The Privatization of Culture

In talking about my last post with a friend, we discussed the difference between what Donald McGavern talked about in the pivotal book "Understanding Church Growth" as planting and building churches that reflect the cultural aspects of a people group versus the niche-marketing of many American evangelical churches.

There is one large cultural aspect that is not often discussed in the Evangelical US world--mostly because it is not much discussed in the broader US world either--and that is what my friend called the "privatization of culture." By and large, Americans demand (sometimes subtly, sometimes overty) assimilation to certain cultural norms. Those could be as big as language, perceived work ethics, and relationship styles; and as small as public mannerisms and modes of dress. This is one of the key reasons that Hispanic immigration is a big issue. Moreso than the immigrants of the past, Hispanics tend to keep their cultural distinctives when they come, assimilating at a slower pace. There are some churches that attract people from different cultures, and again, that's a far sight better than the country club deal. But does that truly make a church multicultural, in the sense described in Revelation, or do those people who do come simply understand that they need to become a part of the dominant culture? Are they people who have already committed to assimilation, or are already assimilated? I would submit that they are at least assimilated in one key factor--economic--if they attend and stay at the typical USAmerican Evangelical church. Like my bro-in-law stated in response to my last post, the biggest cultural obstacle most churches never cross is the level of wealth one. But there are a lot of cultural baggage issues, and unless someone sheds their baggage that isn't like the dominant culture of the church they are attending, they aren't going to stay and may not even be welcome.

Is there a way to celebrate and practice true multicultural community? From the standpoint of public, consumer-oriented church programming, I'm not sure it can be done.

I would also submit that the "predominant obstacle" to doing this is almost always the predominant culture. This is vividly displayed in Kenya right now. I think it's one of the reasons that for 2000 years Christianity has thrived in places where it is not the dominant culture and struggled when it actually becomes so (yes, I'm sure this statement is simplistic, but worth thinking through...). So yes, here in the US, whatever American culture is (I'm not fond of "Anglo" but have yet to find a good sub; even "American" is not too good, considering that every other country in North and South America does not like USAmericans usurping sole use of that word) is the primary obstacle. No matter how hard we try, non-conformity to the USAmerican cultural values is ostracized.

The really bad stuff happens when the dominant culture's values are equated with God's values--the typically pattern when Christianity becomes the dominant culture of a people-group. Jesus' message was about so much more than getting your sins forgiven. When he talks about the kingdom of heaven he's challenging the cultural values of the kingdom of earth--even the American ones, and even (maybe especially!) the religious ones--when they function according to the world's system. Jesus came not just to destroy sin's power over my life/death, but to destroy systemic sin as it operates in the world, and this includes the tribalism of Kenya or the US.

What's the model for the church?

A good friend and missions pastor at my church wrote some thoughts before Christmas:

Subject: Reaching the younger generations

A friend was telling me about going to a Christmas concert recently at one of the more traditional churches in town to see a friend who was involved in the production. He said everyone was dressed to the max and most of the crowd was over 60 and the music was targeted at that audience. My friend, a visitor to the church, said he couldn't find a seat. He was there plenty early but everyone had programs, coats and various articles of clothing strewn about to save seats for family members and apparently whole Sunday School classes. No one said much to him and very few stayed around after the program to fellowship. Based on my friend’s experience, it doesn’t seem like the church was much concerned with the visitors or the lost but mainly interested in pleasing their members.

It reminded me of the experience on our recent vacation cruise to the Caribbean. We were with mostly older people (older than Barbara and I and that is old) and had the same kind of trouble finding seats at the big shows. It dawned on me how much the traditional churches and cruise lines have in common. Like many churches, the cruise experience has stayed virtually the same for the past 50 years. And like most churches, the cruise ships are filled with mostly older people. Until just recently on most all large cruise lines there has been a strict dress code for the meals at night and always two formal nights when you absolutely had to wear a coat and tie. The shows generally were song and dance type of entertainment, to suit an elderly audience. Most of the shore excursions catered to the older crowd also. I don't know if the ships just program for the elderly because the elderly are more inclined to cruise or younger people don't cruise because many ships seem to cater only to the older crowd. But it has been my experience that 80% of those on the cruises are retirement age and up.

But that seems to be changing. Barbara and I were curious about a cruise ship line that we noticed in the Caribbean that we had never seen before. It was the Ocean Village line. I looked them up on the internet and found that they are a new cruise line targeting the 30 - 50 something age. I found it interesting that the cruise line business is just now making an effort to reach out to the younger generations. The Ocean Village line has no dress code for meals and no formal nights at all. The shows have more rock bands and comedians that appeal to the younger group. The shore excursions are more about activities than site seeing.
I can see the traditional cruiser complaining about how the cruises are changing and just going to hell. But the cruise line knows that there should be no reason why younger people don't take cruise vacations. They are a cheap, convenient and very practical way to vacation.
Theologians also know that the young need Christ as much as the old. They have asked some of the same questions about why so many churches have so few young people. Do young people stay away from church because the church caters so much to the older generations or do church leaders feel compelled to program for the elderly because their members are mostly old?

Grace Point is much like the Ocean Village Cruise Line. We purposed several years ago to reach the young and hopefully we will continue to be a vibrant church that is open, evangelistic and concerned about those who do not know Jesus Christ. There is a reason for our style of worship, the encouraged casual dress and the application oriented preaching. We want to reach the lost and the next generation of Christians. Let’s continue to strive to be a church always willing to change its methods without ever compromising the message of the Gospel.

Have a merry and Christ-filled Christmas. And bring your unchurched friends to our Christmas services. They are designed for them.

Here's my response:

These are good thoughts! I have been out of the country during the holidays, and only now getting a chance to dialogue a little about what you say here…No doubt the Ocean Village Cruise Line is a great model for reaching my generation with cruises! I’ve only been on one, and it was a lot of fun, but it sounds like I would really enjoy Ocean Village!

Some questions arise for me though when we compare the two cruise line models to the church. Don’t get me wrong, I think that the GP model is vastly superior to the country club model of so many churches in the US today! But some of these questions still nag at me, and I’d love to hear your and other’s thoughts:

How does a church decide what its target audience is going to be? Is the selection of programming for 30-50 year olds with kids mean that churches are excluding those outside the target? Certainly these are the realities of the business model that you are talking about, commonly called “church-growth”. If you market a product to the young, the old won’t want it. If you market for adults, teens and tweens won’t want it. Etc.

Should we band together as churches, and everyone pick a different market? GP can have the 30-50 group, but someone else has to take the 55+ group, and someone else the 20s, etc. Or should individual churches try to offer something for each group (probably a challenge for the average church)? What about different ethnic groups, or different languages; can we market something for everyone (okay, that would be challenging even for large churches!)?

And probably my most naggiest question: how come so many evangelical churches in the US, especially those who have the church growth model, end up picking middle-class families 30-50 as their target? How come the business-like church growth model doesn’t have a lot of examples of working among the working-class poor? Does the model work without funding?

It seems to me that models are used to get people in the door, or not. But only authentic community both attracts and keeps people in a church. “Look how they love each other” was the lost person’s exclamation of the early church. Is there a model for that?

Welcome Home!

Man! (Please read as a genderless expression...)

Am I glad to be home. The family spent 3 great weeks in Argentina over the holidays. Here's the highlights and lowlights, in no particular order:

• Argentines know how to eat, and how to drink. Every good Argentine home has a parrilla. That's a grill for cooking on, but I hesitate to compare it to anything in the states. It's huge, huger than Texas size, capable of cooking two pigs at once. Entire pigs. I was there, I saw it. And when you order parrilla in a restaurant, you get tons of meat (including things like kidneys and molleja) for a fraction of what you pay in the States for half the food. And the wine--especially my favorite, Malbec--available at every meal and every corner store. [Interestingly, there's very little incidence of drunkenness in Argentina, even though wine is consumed in many homes, even the Baptist ones. But that's another post.] Parrilla for 2-3 people was 50 pesos, about $18US. And a bottle of decent table wine in the kioskos was 5 pesos--$1.80!


• I'm not a great beach person, but it's pretty cool to spend the week between Christmas and New Year's on a beach. I've got the best winter tan ever!


• I read James Michener's "Texas" during the trip. Wow. I now know where a lot of my Texas co-dependencies come from. Great book!


• 9 hour flights are no fun in coach.


• Miami has to be the worst airport in the US.


• Truco is the greatest card game ever. Kind of a combination of spades and poker, it involves lots of bluffing, and bridge players will think that it has cheating built into the rules, as there are standard signals to alert your partners what cards you have. The only problem is the signals are the same for everyone, so your opponents can steal your signals if you're not careful.


• Berisso, the suburb of La Plata where my father in law is from and where we stayed a couple of days, is an hour south of Buenos Aires. It's about the same distance south of the equator as San Antonio is north, with about the same climate. So January there is like July here. And very few people have air conditioning. My family doesn't. So last week when the heat index was 42C (108F), it was hot!


• Alfajor chocolate is the greatest candy bar in existence. Hands down. I brought home 4 cases to prove it.


• Argentina is a great country. But there's no place like home.

Have you ever been here?

McPherson's comic today reminds me of being in a situation where it seems life is working against you. Have you been in that situation? It's the whole "2 steps forward 3 steps back" syndrome. Who's eating your popcorn? Who's ruining your parade?

Are you more tired of Christmas or Christians complaining about Christmas?

But this is hilarious!




Would you go see this movie?

Terry Mattingly's Postmodern/Emergent thoughts

This column was syndicated by Scripps Howard News Service on 11/28/2007

Every half a millennium or so, waves of change rock Christianity until they cause the kind of earthquake that forces historians to start using capital letters.

"What happened before the Great Reformation, we all know," said Phyllis Tickle, author of "God Talk in America" and two dozen books on faith and culture. "We know, for instance, that some sucker sailed west and west and west and didn't fall off the dad gum thing. That was a serious blow."

So Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492 and then a flat, neatly stacked universe flipped upside down. Soon, people were talking about nation states, the decline of landed gentry, the rise of a middle class and the invention of a printing press with movable type. Toss in a monk named Martin Luther and you're talking Reformation -- with a big "R" -- followed by a Counter-Reformation.

Back up 500 years to 1054 and you have the Great Schism that separated Rome and from Eastern Orthodoxy. Back up another 500 years or so and you find the Fall of the Roman Empire. The transformative events of the first century A.D. speak for themselves.
Church leaders who can do the math should be looking over their shoulders about now, argued Tickle, speaking to clergy, educators and lay leaders at the recent National Youth Workers Convention in Atlanta.

After all, seismic changes have been rolling through Western culture for a century or more -- from Charles Darwin to the World Wide Web and all points in between. The result is a whirlwind of spiritual trends and blends, with churches splintering into a dizzying variety of networks and affinity groups to create what scholars call the post-denominational age.

Tickle is ready to call this the "Great Emergence," with a tip of her hat to the edgy flocks in the postmodern "emerging church movement."

"Emerging or emergent Christianity is the new form of Christianity that will serve the whole of the Great Emergence in the same way that Protestantism served the Great Reformation," she said, in a speech that mixed doses of academic content with the wit of a proud Episcopalian from the deeply Southern culture of Western Tennessee.

However, anyone who studies history knows that the birth of something new doesn't mean the death of older forms of faith. The Vatican didn't disappear after the Protestant Reformation.
This kind of revolution, said Tickle, doesn't mean "any one of those forms of earlier Christianity ever ceases to be. It simply means that every time we have one of these great upheavals ... whatever was the dominant form of Christianity loses its pride of place and gives way to something new.

What's giving way, right now, is Protestantism as you and I have always known it."

It helps to think of dividing American Christianity, she said, into four basic streams -- liturgical, Evangelical, Pentecostal-charismatic and old, mainline Protestant. The problem, of course, is that there are now charismatic Episcopalians and Catholics, as well as plenty of Evangelicals who are interested in liturgical worship and social justice. Conservative megachurches are being forced to compromise because of sobering changes in marriage and family life, while many progressive flocks are being blasted apart by conflicts over the same issues.

In other words, the lines are blurring between once distinct approaches to faith. Tickle is convinced that 60 percent of American Christians are worshipping in pews that have, to one degree or another, been touched by what is happening in all four camps. At the same time, each of the quadrants includes churches -- perhaps 40 percent of this picture -- that are determined to defend their unique traditions no matter what.

The truly "emerging churches" are the ones that are opening their doors at the heart of this changing matrix, she said. Their leaders are determined not to be sucked into what they call "inherited church" life and the institutional ties that bind. They are willing to shed dogma and rethink doctrine, in an attempt to tell the Christian story in a new way.

"These emergent folks are enthusiastically steering toward the middle and embracing the whole post-denominational world," said Tickle. "We could end up with something like a new form of Pan-Protestantism. ... It's all kind of exciting and scary at the same time, but we can take some comfort in knowing that Christianity has been through this before."

Terry Mattingly (www.tmatt.net) directs the Washington Journalism Center at the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities. He writes this weekly column for the Scripps Howard News Service.

Here's a great review of The Golden Compass

I was wary from the time I got the email from my mom about The Golden Compass. I have snopes.com and truthorfiction.com on my quick link list for reviewing hoaxes, especially ones that followers of Jesus fall for. (Madeleine Murray O'Hare is dead and is not trying to get "Touched by an Angel", "Highway to Heaven" or "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" off TV...)

But there seems to be some truth to the reaction to The Golden Compass. And CT recently had a great review here, offering a lot of balance, something too often lacking in believers.

1,500 of my closest friends

Some of a recent post of Gordon MacDonald on CT's website. Gordon has a great way to make the normal become spiritual, pregnant with meaning.

My Faves: The People I KeepCreating a new cell-phone directory tested my commitment in ways I didn't expect.by Gordon MacDonald, Leadership editor at large

From my journal: A few weeks ago the cell-phone people notified me that I was eligible for a new phone at a rock-bottom price and that I should stop by their store and do a deal. A day or two later, I converted from TREO to Blackberry.

A technician transferred the contact data—my electronic "phone book"—from the old phone to the new one. "You've got a lot of stuff in the memory," he said referring to the over-three thousand names and numbers I'd accumulated during the past years. "You might want to think of purging it."

In the days that followed I did what the techie suggested, and shrunk the list from 3,000 names to about 1,500. I ended up with 1,500 keepers and 1,500 deleted…people that is.

It is not always an easy task to separate the keepers from the deleted. The exercise forced me to do some reflecting about the nature of my personal relationships.

I quickly saw that the "keepers" fell into four categories. There were my loved ones: wife, children, and grandchildren (they were not only keepers but they made my speed-dial list). There were my friends—dearly valued people who have long been in my life through the darkest and the brightest moments. Then there were colleagues: those to whom one relates because of shared work. And finally there were the networked: people you think you want to keep in touch with because you have common goals and objectives. Oh, a fifth group: the snow-plow guy, the hardware store, and United Airlines. Keepers: all of them.

The more challenging experience was in the deleting.

1,500 of my Closest Friends. I found names of people in the phone's memory, for example, whom I'd met here and there over the years. We had promised that we'd keep in touch or get together for lunch or collaborate on some effort. But the promises were forgotten. Well intentioned as we were when we thumbed each other's numbers into our phones, we simply got on to other things the minute we were out of each other's sight.

How many times have I heard my wife, Gail, say as she watched me enter one of these people into my contact list, "I know you want to connect with him, but I also know that you're too busy. He'll expect your call for the next couple of weeks and when it doesn't come, he'll think you were insincere."

Gail's right.

My eyes (for connection) are bigger than my stomach (my ability to digest all the relationships I'd like to have)...

These deletions caused me to reflect on the flimsiness of too many so-called Christian relationships where there is far more talk about faithfulness than action. I thought of how easy it is for people to turn on one another the minute things go awry. And I felt sad.

I confess to a feeling of fiendish satisfaction as I hit the delete button on some of these names. I felt the urge to say. "There! You're gone! No way you're going to get into my new phone." It was as if by deleting someone from my phone list I could make a bad memory go away forever.

Now there were those who walked out of my life for "natural causes." "San Diego pays more," they said. Or, "Florida's warmer." Or, "The company is moving me to Des Moines." Having spoken, they disappeared leaving in their trail only an occasional Christmas card or e-mail. But they left, sometimes to my consternation. Deleting their names reminds me that we live in a wildly mobile society where most relationships have short, practical shelf lives. No wonder young people are opting for small groups and less of the big stuff. They seek stability. Me, too.
A few names in line for deletion were those who have died in the past years. Once they had been vigorous, contributive people. Now they're gone. In many cases their loss was grieved for a few days. But then those of us still among the living had to get on with life and its demands. I found myself brooding on how long, when I die, I'll remain on some peoples' contact list. Not long, I suspect.

A significant number of those slated for deletion were people who have simply stopped playing any role in my life. For a moment our lives had connected as they picked me up at an airport or provided hospitality for me in their home. But it was only a one-time shot: pleasant, interesting, but one time. How often I'd said of these people, "I'd give anything to know them better." But it wasn't meant to be.

Now and then as I scanned the contact list on the old phone I saw names of people who might be called evangelical celebrities. They're people it's fun to say you know. But you really don't know them; you just shook their hands once and got their number. It's hard to delete them. Just having their number tempts you to feel important in a very superficial way. (Billy Graham once warned me about name-dropping.)

God's Delete Button-Purging my phone list has been a healthy exercise. It has reminded me that there is a certain collection of people in this world whose friendship and partnership I really prize. Wonderful people whose love for God and commitment to his agenda are inspiring to me. Christlike people who working with has been (and remains) a humble privilege.

But there were other lessons for me. That I actually liked deleting some names forced me to realize that as much as I believe in no grudge-holding, there is always a bit of residual vindictiveness deep in my heart, in all of us, perhaps. It bothers me that in some cases I really enjoyed hitting the delete button.

Oh, there was one more lesson. I was forced to wonder if God would ever be tempted to purge his list of people. Did this happen in the Noah story? Was it about to happen the day he told Moses he was at his wits end with Israel? Has God ever wished to quietly delete me? Does God even have a delete button?

Pastor and author Gordon MacDonald is chair of World Relief and editor at large for Leadership.

I've always used "Supreme Commander, Lord, Dictator of the Universe, but this will work

My Peculiar Aristocratic Title is: His Eminence the Very Lord Arnold the Chimerical of New Invention Get your Peculiar Aristocratic Title

Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, book summary

Okay, a few weeks back I promised some thoughts on Stephen Barr's book. Well, let me first of all say that it's great reading, and it's stimulating information. And while I'm sure he worked at getting it all down to a less scientific reading level, it's also challenging! There are lots of technical explanations of various processes and theories, so I do recommend it, but let's just say I've had to renew it 3 times from my library 'cause it ain't no 1-hour read!

The book revolves around what Barr calls 5 "plot twists" along the way of trying to write off religion and approach the universe in an exclusively materialistic philosophy. He introduces these early, then the remainder of the book is opening up each plot twist from a scientific point of view.

#1 The Big Bang points to a beginning. Materialism had posited an eternal universe, where matter had always existed. This wasn't a new thought (ancient pagan Greeks also thought this) but much of the 19th and 20th century scientists pushed the idea. But evidence pointing to the Big Bang points to a beginning.

#2 The complexity and beauty of the mathematics underlying the laws of physics and the even deeper laws that seem to govern those laws does not answer the question of "why the universe?" In fact it seems to beg the question even further, moving it to the front of discussion.

#3 "The universe and its laws seem in some respects to be balanced on a knife-edge..." Movement either way, and life doesn't exist. There are a series of "anthropic coincidences" that defy the chance-requirements of naturalistic materialism.

#4 The existence of human intellect pushes us to see the human mind as more than just machine.

#5 Quantum theory has brought about a revolution in the scientific determinism inherint in materialism.

This is obviously a very brief summary of the book. But if you're interested in learning some scientific facts and seeing how those facts point for or against materialism as a philosophical explanation of the universe, I recommend this book.