reading: "The Coming Evangelical Collapse" by Michael Spencer

  An article has been flying around a group of friends out the Christian Science Monitorby Michael Spencer called The Coming Evangelical Collapse.  It's a provocative title, but it's about pretty much what it says it is.  Article  What's interesting so far is that the discussion I'm hearing in the group is less about the veracity of the article and more about whether this is a good or a bad thing.  All those in the discussion are strong evangelicals.  The question is whether what is left from this time is more faithful to Christ than what entered.  It may be smaller.  It will certainly have a less dominant role in secular culture.  But it may be deeper, stronger, and more like salt to the world than just plain ol' being like the world.  

Here's a couple quotes:  

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. [that sums up the heart of the Wineskins - going from regulatory institution to equipping network]

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. [I like that he says "appropriate" instead of merely "relevant"]

I believe the relationship of the body of Christ with our surrounding culture in America is changing.  We are being forced to a relationship that reflects the relationship the early church had with its culture.  Evangelical culture will change with it.  I do not for a second, though, believe that the gospel or the body of Christ is threatened.  Rather, we're in a time of seeing God do a new thing.  

Veronica is fond of telling me that she saw this article in its original form.  She keeps up with Spencer's blog: The Internet Monk    Take a look!

Comments

[Donald Bowes]

While we may not be at the beginning of the "evalgelical collapse" we are certainly right in the middle of the rubber-meeting-the-road phase.

Reading through the Book of Judges last week, I couldn't help noticing the recurring phrase: "In those days, Israel had no king, everyone did as he saw fit". I think this phrase has enormous portent for the evangelical movement as we know it. We have lost our "first love", and in many cases we have consciously chosen to relegate the King of Glory to the back seat in favor of consumerism/political correctness, pleasing the masses, attracting newcomers by our concentration on evangelical "outreach" within our worship time, constructing our own idols of entertainment, jokes and cool music, as if they were pre-eminent and necessary elements to attract more people to come. In so doing, we have watered down the message of God's redemptive plan for mankind, needlessly throwing away the "big words" of redemption, sanctification, justification and repentance because they "turned people off". We have given way to playing a numbers game as the one true measure that measures successful ministry, and spiritual formation has gotten lost in the shuffle.

Now that the economic crisis is hitting our culture in a big way, we will begin to see how this failed paradigm will impact the lives of those who are broken and hurting. There is no more exciting time to be alive and ministering in the Kingdom of God. He will call His Church back to Himself. In many cases, it won't be pretty, because it never has been. (Won't it be interesting to talk to Zerubbabel, Daniel and Nehemiah about what it was like living in captivity?)

[Donald Bowes]

Check out this article by Bishop Jackson that references Spencer:
http://townhall.com/columnists/HarryRJacksonJr/2009/03/30/evangelicals_the_time_is_now!

[Veronica]

"SITTING in the audience at "American Idol" is a little like going to one of those suburban mega-churches where they worship by the thousands in unison.

You are not allowed to sit quietly in your chair. You are instructed when to scream, clap and otherwise carry on for the contestants, the judges and the host. And you would be surprised at how effortless it all is."

This is a direct quote taken from a New York Post article on American Idol.

I'm partly appalled and partly fascinated at how well the "outside" world sees and understands what most of us "inside" the church call worship. I wish I could say they're wrong...

[Donald Bowes]

A question from the sojourner would be: "What makes you any different? And what is it that you actually believe in anyway?" The answer from the congregant would be: "Well, if you want to know that you should talk to the pastor. He has all the answers. I just come here to be part of something that is...I don't know...it's cool and I like it, and I feel good afterwards! I am glad you came, and I hope you come back!"

On another subject: The controversy at Notre Dame with the Great One being invited to speak and receive an honorary degree has some interesting theological and moral implications. Here is a great article on the subject:
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=1355

[Donald Bowes]

Here is an interesting comment from an advertising executive who pefers anonymity because he is a conservative working in a hugely liberal environment and whose job would be in jeopardy if his positions on critical issues were known. I found these comments a propos for the discussion we have started above insofar as they indicate a clear understanding of the social media in which we are all presently communicating. Lots to learn here:

"It was a really long March, filled with client projects, new business pitches, interactive seminars, and several speaking engagements. I'm just now getting back to a somewhat normal routine. While my mind was on mainstream marketing the whole month, it was completely impossible to ignore the chaos that completely characterizes American political discourse these days. It's getting wacky out there.

The Obama administration continues to re-define the idea of "rookie missteps," and the GOP continues to swing weakly and wildly in all directions without landing a single punch. As a result, the missteps aren't resonating individually with the public (although, it seems they may be beginning to resonate, collectively, to some). And there is no clear alternative being offered in a timely fashion by our side. Hmm. From my experience, this is what happens when you pit a nimble and fluid communications organization against one that is slow and deliberate. In today's climate, with today's technology, nimble wins -- even with missteps.

After one of my speaking gigs, a talk on social media I give to various groups, I was approached by a 20-something communicator who was frustrated because the management of her organization wanted to use the tools of social media, but didn't grasp the principles of the space. I could tell she knew what she was doing -- but they didn't listen much to her, because she wasn't a part of senior management. It's a familiar story: Management has heard of the new tools, isn't really sure what they do or how to use them -- but, well, because it seems the whole world has this Twitter thing, and we need one, too. Those young people know about this stuff, but we're not completely comfortable letting them run with it. We'll get them to set it up, and then we'll control it from there.

Management that is new to the social media space is almost universally flabbergasted by the notion that to use the space effectively, they cannot attempt to throttle the message. I believe this comes from the long-standing misguided notion that advertisers have ever controlled the message. In fact, they haven't.

I remember a few years back getting an email from someone in a European ad agency who wanted to upload her clients' TV commercials to the web. She wanted to know if I knew of some sort of fail-safe way that could prevent people from downloading the commercials, and making fun of them (what we now call a mashup.) I wrote her back to assure her that not only was there no way to prevent that from happening if she uploaded, in fact, there was no way to prevent it at all. They were TV commercials. What's to keep people from taping them off the air, and doing a mashup? The point is, new media isn't suddenly allowing people to publicly disagree with you. They've always been able to do that. It just makes it more visible, and much faster. So you have two choices: You can clam up and say nothing; or you can voice your opinion in a way that appeals to more people, so fewer thinking people will be tempted to mashup what you say. Note here that controlling people so they don't publicly disagree with you is not an available option.

The second big stumbling block for management unaccustomed to social media is the labor-intensive nature of the space. This is not a "set it and forget it" world. It's an ongoing conversation, 27/7, and anyone can, and does, play. If you want to be a part of the conversation, not only must your content be relevant, it must also be fresh. And frequently "fresh," in this space, means minutes. Which is a far cry from the months most organizations are used to having to respond to a shift in the market, or in opinion. Because there's so much to keep up with, and so much to respond to, social media is a difficult place for the top-down, micro-management inclined. There's no time for a committee to debate and tweak every Tweet -- because by the time that's done, the Tweet is irrelevant. The world has moved on.

An understanding of the space is necessary before any organization can effectively employ the tools of the space. Buying a new set of golf clubs doesn't make you Tiger Woods. The tools are just tools --but the space is made up of people, all of whom have opinions you hope to sway. They've created the space, and they have rules for it. If you're not willing to play by the prevailing, and constantly changing, rules of the space, you're going to lose very quickly. The people who know the rules of the space best are the people who live in the space. In most long-estalished organizations, those people are the youngest people in the place. They're almost never in upper management.

Social media favors nimble organizations that are not afraid to share opinions that brew from the bottom of the organization up. Which isn't the picture of a typical old-school advertiser, and certainly isn't the picture of the GOP. When I asked the 20-something what her organization did, she told me she worked for a conservative interest group. Sadly, I wasn't surprised."

[Donald Bowes]

As a matter of clarification, there is no judgement either towards liberal or conservative in the above post. This is not political, and it was certainly not my intention to be so. I merely wanted to point out the challenges we have communcating in the culture.