what's wrong with the church?
theology main
bread and circuses main
as with any large institution, the church (global; church as in all christians) is full
of detractors. since it is religious by nature, and struggles with the tension of being a very real and human
group attempting to fulfill an ideal and divine function, criticisms that the church
doesn't live up to its own ideals are ridiculously easy to levy (church people [christians]
aren't nice, aren't friendly, etc); these are essentially condemnations of hypocrisy, real or
perceived. but, without denying that such criticisms are often valid, i would like to establish
that i view my complaints as of a different nature; in my mind, my complaints
are not that the church isn't living up to its stated ideals, but that the church has (at least some
of) the wrong ideals altogether.
a note of explanation before starting; i frequently use the term 'christian' synonomously (roughly) with
'evangelical' in this document. also, the intent of this paper is not to attack christianity, but rather
to defend it from what i consider to be harmful trends and developments.
complaint one : christianity isn't a religion, it's a relationship
to be fair, much of the intent of this statement is to differentiate 'true' christianity
from false; many people have wrong ideas about what christianity is, and this statement
is intended to show them the differences between their perception of christianity from
their culture and the reality of christianity as specified in the bible. however, to a
modern evangelical, this statement also underlies a fundamental belief about the nature
of christianity; christianity is a relationship with god that involves sensory and/or
emotional interaction and interplay. this idea is, in my opinion, the basic precept
most christians hold concerning the nature of christianity; i.e., if you ask a christian
'what is the christian life?', the answer will revolve around experiencing god personally.
i fundamentally disagree with this focus; in my opinion, the christian's aim should be
to fulfill the commands of god. obedience is the goal and measure of a christian, not
experiencing intimacy with god. the bible never promises that the christian will interact with
god supernaturally on earth; indeed, i am not aware of a single biblical reference that encourages
christians to expect such. there definitely is no imperative to "earnestly seek to feel the presence
of god"; indeed, moses is celebrated as exceptional precisely because of his direct interaction with
god (deu. 34:10). the real focus is suprisingly measurable (and primarily social, from an ethical
standpoint). christians are repeatedly exhorted to love one another (john 13:34, 15:12, etc), to
prefer one another (rom 12:10), to consider others as more important than themselves (phil. 2:3) etc...
time and time again, when the bible turns to what we are to do and be in light of the character
and actions of god, it defines christianity in surprisingly concrete terms and actions (the
requirements presented are difficult [even impossible], but they are very easy to understand
and to undertake).
i would further argue that the majority of confusion over the nature of the christian life comes from
a misunderstanding of the word 'faith'. to most christians, faith indicates the unwavering belief
in a principle (often held in opposition to logic); i would argue that the bible uses the term to
refer to action taken to align oneself with a principle that is demonstrated to be true. but that
is another topic that i hope to write about separately...
the result of this disagreement is that the majority of exhortation issued to and by christians concerns
their intimacy with god instead of their moral character. this is a bit curious given the frequency with
which christians are exhorted to behave correctly (eph. 5, col 3, phil. 3, 1 john, etc) and the dearth of passages
encouraging christians to have longer quiet times. this has two negative effects: the first is that the
focus is shifted away from obedience to the clearly specified goals of the bible, and the second is that
it leaves many christians feeling guilty for not having more defined interaction with god.
i believe that the correct focus for a christian is to exert himself (in the gender neutral sense) towards
fulfilling the laws and commands of the bible to as great a degree as possible. i think that the focus of
the bible is clear on this point, and that maturity is measured ethically (how complete is the obedience of
christian) and not relationally (how intimate do you feel with god). i also believe that if pastors/teachers
restricted their applications to those given in the passages they were teaching, this would come across
correctly.
before leaving this point, it should additionally be pointed out that christianity is very definitely a
religion.
addendum :
it should be made clear that i'm not attacking feelings and emotions; emotions are a proper
response to events and ideas. i do not believe that ideas should be based on emotions however; truth
and falsehood should not be determined by emotional 'proofs'. christianity should not be presented as
true because of feeling, nor should the christian life be defined by emotional whims. it should be
recognized that the christian life will (and should) contain emotion, but that these emotions do not
define the quality of the christian.
complaint two : church services
specifically, i'd like to attack singing (this complaint is an extension of my complaint in point one; if you didn't
agree with that one, you probably won't agree with this one either.) evangelical church services now devote a large
amount of time to 'praise and worship' (singing), a tradition that has come to be (in practice if not in theory) useful for
little more than encouraging an incorrect mindset of emotionally based, experiential christianity. many of
the songs themselves have lyrics which directly state such ideas, but even those with relatively concrete lyrics
are often used in a manner that i consider emotionally manipulative (e.g. music leaders often switch to minor
keys, drop the tempo, and declare that it is now time to enter the presence of god; that is a cue to the
audience that it's time to close their eyes, assume pious expressions, and maybe raise a hand or two).
by contrast, when paul discusses singing (col. 3:16, eph. 5:19), it is listed as a way to encourage fellow
christians and as an expression of joy; in other words, music in the church in many ways acts in much the same way
humans have always used music, secular or christian. the difference is the fellowship, the cause for joy, and the ideas
expressed. a more biblical use of singing would avoid emotional manipulation, and would fit within the goals laid out
in scripture, existing as an expression of joy and thanksgiving to god and of communal encouragement and exhortation
to christians.
complaint three : the overspiritualization of christian ethics
my complaint here centers on the concept of what the christian is to do and how the christian life should be lived.
modern christianity lays a great burden on the christian to 'be intimate' with god, to spend time daily 'communing'
with jesus, and to 'listen' to the holy spirit. the great majority of applications issued from pulpits concern these
concepts, giving christians the idea that the life of a christian should center on relating to god. by way of
example, an illustration i have frequently heard to reinforce the idea of the importance of 'spending time daily with
god' is that jesus is a friend who has agreed to meet with you every morning in your living room. at first, you arise
faithfully every day and spend time with him. but gradually you grow too busy, and you start to skip a day here and a
day there, eventually falling out of the habit completely. one day, as you dash out of your house, you see out of a
corner of your eye that he is still waiting for you in the living room and you realize that you have misplaced your
priorities, head into the living room, and restore your life to the proper balance.
this, in my opinion, gives people unbibilical ideas about what to expect out of christianity. as discussed earlier,
the bible doesn't paint the life of a christian in terms anything similar to these. rather, it defines christianity
in surprisingly concrete terms, iterating a consistent set of imperatives that, while incredibly difficult (even
impossible), are refreshingly understandable. when paul lists the characteristics that should define the mature
christian, he does not define the richness of one's 'quiet time' (nor does he ever even raise the topic of a quiet time),
but rather, he lists attributes that should be evidenced : "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
gentleness, self-control" (gal. 5:22,23).