From Notes from a Common-place Book...
Occasionally, I may be guilty of constructing Evangelical straw men, from which I wax sarcastic about the excesses and inanities of American pop-religiosity. You and me both. Not that this takes any great skill, mind you, given the surfeat of material with which to work. In this season of resolutions, perhaps I should resolve to do better in the coming year. Or not.
But this article--Metro Churches Turn to Technology to Spread the Word--truly troubled me, as I found it sillier and even more offensive than most. (Owen by way of Aaron has previously noted the article.) This story is a familiar one by now. To those who turn a critical eye towards the state of religion in America, many of these evangelical churches became unmoored long ago, and are now far at sea. This newspaper account differs little from countless others I have read in recent years documenting evangelical trendiness....except for one line.
Journalist Malena Lott posits: "If Jesus were alive today, would he Twitter? Have a Facebook profile? Flickr account? Post proof of his miracles on YouTube?" I once heard Zbigniew Brzezinski--not one to suffer even good-natured fools gladly--characterize a question put to him by Joe Scarborough as "stunningly superficial." Ms. Lott's inquiry is worthy of the same treatment. Indeed, it is so light and fluffy that the words are in danger of floating off the page.
The entire line of thought is so patently absurd that I completely missed the real significance of the passage. Ms. Lott begins with If Jesus were alive today. Think about it. I do understand what she is trying to say, namely "If Jesus were physically walking the earth today, etc." But that is not what she said. These articles often attempt to serve as a feeble corrective or as food for thought (would Christ be a Democrat or a Republican, would people listen to Him today if he spoke to us on a street corner, what would he say about the Christians of today, etc.). There is a lack of understanding that Christ instituted a Church so that it could speak on these matters - more specifically, Tradition should guide us more than hypothetical constructs. The failure to understand the importance and role of koinonia sends journalists off on 'Jesus and me' suppositional escapades.
Such sloppiness can be excused, perhaps, from a journalist. But then, the person to which the question was addressed--the "online community pastor at LifeChurch.tv"--used the exact same wording in his response. He replied: If Jesus were alive, I don’t think he’d have to use social media...His followers all have mobile phones. They’d be spreading his message for him. Is the point that no Church currently exists in this scenario and that Christ is appearing for the first time? If so, I doubt mankind would treat Him any better now than they did then regardless of the advent of the 3G network. Is the point that the followers of Christ would make use of modern technology to spread the Gospel? The salvific message is transmitted through prayer, fasting, and almsgiving. Websites, Twitter, Facebook, etc. are all just signs pointing to the Church. They are not the Church themselves. Is the point that Christians would welcome His return and joyfully get to texting? I think any serious Christian that discovers it is the second coming of Christ knows to put the cellphone down.
I found it absolutely stunning for a purported Christian pastor to say "if" Jesus were alive today. Everything else in the story is secondary when compared to this unintended statement of faith. That is the whole point of the empty tomb, is it not? This is no quibble over semantics. One cannot equivocate on such matters. The whole point of our Faith is that Jesus Christ is alive, and and the only life we have as Christians is when we lose our lives in His.
Such statements should be expected, I suppose, in churches where The Word has become words on a page, where the Living Christ has became the author of useful moralistic teachings, where cheap sentimentality and "assurance" have replaced any sense of asceticism. I do not see this trend abating at all. It will become increasingly difficult, however, to characterize adherents as anything discernibly Christian. To stretch the ancient Christian ship imagery: Once you jump off the boat and decide to build your own boat you are no longer a shipmate to those still standing on the deck. When you and your new shipmates break apart the pieces of the new boat over a disagreement, again, you are no longer shipmates with your old crew. This will continue on and on until thousands of vessels dot the ocean going in different directions, no longer speaking the same language, and no longer building boats that the original boat would recognize as a boat.
But this article--Metro Churches Turn to Technology to Spread the Word--truly troubled me, as I found it sillier and even more offensive than most. (Owen by way of Aaron has previously noted the article.) This story is a familiar one by now. To those who turn a critical eye towards the state of religion in America, many of these evangelical churches became unmoored long ago, and are now far at sea. This newspaper account differs little from countless others I have read in recent years documenting evangelical trendiness....except for one line.
Journalist Malena Lott posits: "If Jesus were alive today, would he Twitter? Have a Facebook profile? Flickr account? Post proof of his miracles on YouTube?" I once heard Zbigniew Brzezinski--not one to suffer even good-natured fools gladly--characterize a question put to him by Joe Scarborough as "stunningly superficial." Ms. Lott's inquiry is worthy of the same treatment. Indeed, it is so light and fluffy that the words are in danger of floating off the page.
The entire line of thought is so patently absurd that I completely missed the real significance of the passage. Ms. Lott begins with If Jesus were alive today. Think about it. I do understand what she is trying to say, namely "If Jesus were physically walking the earth today, etc." But that is not what she said. These articles often attempt to serve as a feeble corrective or as food for thought (would Christ be a Democrat or a Republican, would people listen to Him today if he spoke to us on a street corner, what would he say about the Christians of today, etc.). There is a lack of understanding that Christ instituted a Church so that it could speak on these matters - more specifically, Tradition should guide us more than hypothetical constructs. The failure to understand the importance and role of koinonia sends journalists off on 'Jesus and me' suppositional escapades.
Such sloppiness can be excused, perhaps, from a journalist. But then, the person to which the question was addressed--the "online community pastor at LifeChurch.tv"--used the exact same wording in his response. He replied: If Jesus were alive, I don’t think he’d have to use social media...His followers all have mobile phones. They’d be spreading his message for him. Is the point that no Church currently exists in this scenario and that Christ is appearing for the first time? If so, I doubt mankind would treat Him any better now than they did then regardless of the advent of the 3G network. Is the point that the followers of Christ would make use of modern technology to spread the Gospel? The salvific message is transmitted through prayer, fasting, and almsgiving. Websites, Twitter, Facebook, etc. are all just signs pointing to the Church. They are not the Church themselves. Is the point that Christians would welcome His return and joyfully get to texting? I think any serious Christian that discovers it is the second coming of Christ knows to put the cellphone down.
I found it absolutely stunning for a purported Christian pastor to say "if" Jesus were alive today. Everything else in the story is secondary when compared to this unintended statement of faith. That is the whole point of the empty tomb, is it not? This is no quibble over semantics. One cannot equivocate on such matters. The whole point of our Faith is that Jesus Christ is alive, and and the only life we have as Christians is when we lose our lives in His.
Such statements should be expected, I suppose, in churches where The Word has become words on a page, where the Living Christ has became the author of useful moralistic teachings, where cheap sentimentality and "assurance" have replaced any sense of asceticism. I do not see this trend abating at all. It will become increasingly difficult, however, to characterize adherents as anything discernibly Christian. To stretch the ancient Christian ship imagery: Once you jump off the boat and decide to build your own boat you are no longer a shipmate to those still standing on the deck. When you and your new shipmates break apart the pieces of the new boat over a disagreement, again, you are no longer shipmates with your old crew. This will continue on and on until thousands of vessels dot the ocean going in different directions, no longer speaking the same language, and no longer building boats that the original boat would recognize as a boat.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment