The Me Regeneration

Relevant magazine, the house organ of hip postmodern evangelicalism, recently published the following "testimony" from a reader named Ashli in its letters to the editor column:

For the past few years, I, like many other twenty-something Christians, have gotten bitter against the Church. The Church is severely lacking twenty-something ministry. An awesome friend of mine bought me a Relevant subscription for Christmas last year and, I want to tell you, it has changed my life. It made me realize my relationship with God is not based on the church as a body, but my body as His church. Keep up the good work.

The editor responded by calling the letter "a high note" for the magazine.

Now, there has always been an anti-ecclesial, individualistic pathology within vast sectors of parachurch evangelicalism's youth culture. The problem is that this youth culture seems so often in the driver's seat of much of what constitutes American Christianity these days. Ecclesiology comes and goes; but narcissism is always "relevant."

Comments

[Rick]

Mr. Moore,

I'm 45 years old. I'm not hip. I don't believe I'm post modern.

Neither am I sure that I could so easily be called a narcissist, at least certainly not a young one.

I've been reading Mere Comments for some time, adding this place to my own blogroll.

There's much we agree on.

This particular post however does not fall under the we-agree umbrella.

There is a problem, in my view, with organized, main-line Christiandom that can't so easily be blamed on liberalism. I'm not sure what that problem is but I am sure that labelling those who see the problem as narcissists does little to move anyone towards a solution.

I'm not sure that I'm bitter toward the church. Bitterness isn't what I feel when I attend (which lately has been infrequent).

Empty more describes that feeling. Perhaps that's more a me problem than I want to recognize or admit to. But there's a lot of "me's" out there it seems and a lot of me's tends to make a collective and that collective, in my flawed view, should be given some modicum of respect.

I'll describe myself (for the sake of relevance) as a political conservative, and once a rather staunch theological one. Of late however, I seem to see that the focus of the theological conservative is the salvation of the lost, a focus that seems to diminish the social and justice focus that was an integral part of Christ's time on earth.

Yet I'm also seeing that the Religious Left are, in many ways, merely a different flavor of what they deem to be a fundamentalist. And they seem to minimize salvation of the lost while focusing solely on justice and social issues.

Which leads me to wonder aloud, where someone like myself goes.

I abhor the label moderate. I'm not a moderate. I'm a conservative who believes that in some way the conservatives in the Church need to moderate their focus.

In any case, I've rambled on long enough.

I'm simply looking for something other than what seems to me to be a dismissive tone toward many in the Church who, like that twenty-something quoted, senses something missing.

[Roger Bennett]

Disaffection from entities calling themselves "church" is no great surprise - more on this later. But there are better and worse reasons for disaffection.

Ashli reports disaffection for patently trivial reasons, and the ecclesiology she perceives "Relevant" as affirming is centered in her body rather than Christ's body (His Church). That's why "anti-ecclesial, individualistic pathology" is apt.

Rick's feeling of "empty" seemingly is another matter. He has tentatively located it in the missing social and justice focus of churches, but perhaps what Rick really is missing is real worship in the real Church. His concern does not appear anti-ecclesial and individualistic.

Jesus Christ promised to build His Church, against which the gates of hell would not prevail. The first great creed of the Church confesses belief in "one holy catholic and apostolic Church" just as it confesses belief in Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

I left a pretty serious brand of Protestantism seven years ago for Orthodoxy. There is one other contender than Orthodoxy for the title "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic": Roman Catholicism. I would urge any disaffected Protestant (especially those who perceive that something is missing rather feeling than the whole religion thing is thing intrinsically boring) to attend some Catholic and Orthodox churches while reading Tom Howard's "Evangelical Is Not Enough" (Catholic) and Matthew Gallatin's "Thirsting for God in a Land of Shallow Wells" (Orthodox). The books are no substitute for the experience of Orthodox liturgy, but the liturgy may seem too complicated to bother with absent some of the insights you can get from the books.

[Paddy O.]

I am curious if rather than seeing this letter as a narcissistic note we can see this as a stirring of the Holy Spirit in this woman. Can discontent in the young be pointing towards errors in the established church?

It was so for Calvin, and Luther, and Wesley, and Anthony, and Cassian, and the many others who pushed for change within the Church while comparatively young. Are all the original Protestants at their core narcissists? Are the early monastics narcissists? I would argue that the Church as a whole, in all its various manifestations, benefited from these young people's discontent and willingness to find Christ wherever he was present, even when the Church was not always helpful.

It sounds to me like this woman experienced a heart strangely warmed, and was drawn towards Christ. The spiritual realities of the twenties and thirties has long been discounted, especially for those who do not have families of their own.

By not listening to the concerns and joys of this letter are we showing ourselves to be the truly narcissistic ones, unable to appreciate the work of the Spirit in others unlike us?

The Church has been built in part by the discontent of young adults throughout history, as they react to the Spirit in them, and react against the all to static realities of each era. From the earliest centuries until now this has been the case, and most of the leaders of the Church could be characterized as narcissists of a sort, certainly the early monastics could be such, if one did not appreciate that above all things, even the Church, they sought Christ.

In the past those most dedicated to the pursuit of Christ wandered out to the desert. Whither the desert in a modern world? Look to where the same sorts of people gather, and gather together.

[Jenna]

Ach, du Lieber! as we Lutherans like to say.

Poster #3, it's more likely that Ashley has experienced the failure of the "moral therapeutic deism" (reference post below) she's mistaken for Christianity than a stirring of the Holy Spirit. The tipoff, for me, was the phrase "...the Church is severely lacking twenty-something ministy". This, when most of the North American church for the past 30 years has been transforming itself into an expanded and all-pervasive form of youth group ministry! Somehow, somewhere, her perceived "needs" weren't catered to in just the fashion she demanded, and she's not used to not having what she wants, when she wants it, the way she wants it.

This young lady needs to take to heart the fact that we are called to "be imitators of God, as dear children, and to live a life of love" patterned after that of our Master, Jesus, "who did not come to be served, but to serve." The only specialized ministry she, or any twenty-something needs, is the same thing that EVERY sinner of ANY age needs: regular preaching of the forgiviness of sins and proper administration and reception of Holy Communion.

[Gary]

I think it is interesting that the more "liberal and progressive" Christians become the more they feel free (and the need) to move away from the words of the Bible. The Church, the ecclesia, by definition is the "gathering of the called out ones." It doesn't mean the gathering of me, myself and I, no matter how much I might like the sound of that. My body might be "the temple" but it's not "the church." Let's try to keep things straight.

[Padre Dave]

What is really amazing to me is how superficial dear Ahli's (and many, many, many more like her) knowledge of the Church.

As stated above, it's simply not about experience, though experience CAN be a fruit of a well-eucharistised faith. It's about the Triune God....oh, there I go being traditional again.

After 30 years of teaching in a public community college, I realized that we now have 2 generations of folks who have not grown up in the Church. I actually had students say "You're a Pastor, right? Can I come to your church? I've never been in a church before...they won't do anything "weird" to me, or anything, will they?" My usual reply was that everything we do there will be "weird" compared to the culture you have been raised in, but don't be suprised if God does something amazing to you by hearing His Word.....and then prepare to receive His sacraments.

A calm, very patient and persistent approach may show our young folks the joy of faithful reception of the grace of God and lead them to everlasting life in the communion of saints.