The Regrets Of Those Who Are Dying

Monday, August 30th, 2010

House In Field, small

One of my favorite blogs is mnmal.org. (I read this one every day, even if I don’t understand some of the tech stuff he writes about.) Today the author linked to another blog written by someone who has worked extensively in hospices, and the subject of the post is the top regrets of those who are dying.

It is an interesting and thought provoking read. The top five regrets she lists are

- Not being true to your own dreams.

- Working too hard/much.

- Not being more open about your true feelings.

- Not staying in touch with friends and loved ones.

- Not choosing happiness and joy.

“Lord, “So teach us to number our days,   That we may gain a heart of wisdom.” (Psalm 90:12)

Read the whole post here.

By Pat K

Calling It A Church Doesn’t Make It Christian

Monday, August 16th, 2010

DespairIf you ever want to see me get passionate quickly, put me in the room with a bunch of people who are considering leaving the church – and I mean passionately defensive of them. But if you ever want to see me lose all remnants of decorum, add in people who will defend the church at all costs.

(Listen to “The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church” for FREE.)

The last couple days have been interesting. I’ve had a Wall Street Journal article forwarded to me by several people, and by itself it inclined me to post something about it here on our blog. But now I’ve run across some other discussions on the web and on Facebook which happen to be making the rounds at the same time.

What is it about a building – a structure of wood, metal, glass and stone… or worse, wood, drywall, a stage, and a heads-up display or projector and serious sound system – which makes it a church?

The title of the WSJ article I read is entitled, “The Perils of ‘Wannabe Cool’ Christianity” – or better, to use the name of the page on the WSJ website, “The Perils of Hipster Christianity and Why Young Evangelicals Reject Churches That Try To Be Cool”. The writer briefly considers why so many young people are walking away from church entirely.

Mr. McCracken, who describes himself as a 27-year-old evangelical, quickly identifies the problem:

Recent statistics have shown an increasing exodus of young people from churches, especially after they leave home and live on their own. In a 2007 study, Lifeway Research determined that 70% of young Protestant adults between 18-22 stop attending church regularly.

I won’t cover how some churches are trying to solve this problem. I invite you to read the entire article yourself. Instead, I’d like to jump right to the take-away lines offered by Mr. McCracken in his summation:

As a twentysomething, I can say with confidence that when it comes to church, we don’t want cool as much as we want real.

If we are interested in Christianity in any sort of serious way, it is not because it’s easy or trendy or popular. It’s because Jesus himself is appealing, and what he says rings true. It’s because the world we inhabit is utterly phony, ephemeral, narcissistic, image-obsessed and sex-drenched—and we want an alternative. It’s not because we want more of the same.

What have we here at NRP been saying?

(Listen to “The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church” for FREE.)

Then, to add insult to injury, I find this line making its way around Facebook: “Going to Church Doesn’t Make You Any More a Christian Than Going to the Garage Makes You a Car”

I’m going to come at this from the other side now. Let me ask you something. (And this is mostly aimed at my fellow Lutherans.) When was the last time you visited other churches, particularly ones not in your own denomination, and especially ones which could be considered ‘mega’ or at least on the cutting edge of ‘contemporary’?

I and some friends have done this. We visited some of the most well known contemporary churches available here in southern California. We called it our Megachurch Whirlwind Tour. (I think Pat has mentioned this before in one of our podcasts.) I won’t name names, but a couple of them are well-known even outside the U.S. We did it so we could know first hand what people were hearing on any given Sunday. Heck, we even got my father to tag along for one of these. You can only imagine how much it stands out when Dr. Rosenbladt sits in a contemporary church of a relatively smaller size. I can’t tell you how many people were craning their necks to figure out who this visitor was. (His age was not part of their targeted demographic. He was a 60-something guy in a sea of 20-somethings.)

The reason I say this is that I’ve seen some discussion detailing why going to church makes a Christian. (Baptism, assembly of the congregation and at the Lord’s Table for His Supper.) This is, of course, true. But too often, those who are analyzing the people leaving the church too often assume that other churches have the same Christ-centered content as theirs. This is too often not at all accurate.

Having visited the shining examples of today’s contemporary churches, as well as a couple of their offshoots, I can tell you the one thing that matters: Christ is not being preached there. His Gospel is entirely absent.

(Listen to “The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church” for FREE.)

So, to return to the discussion spawned from Facebook, what makes a church Christian? If no Christ is preached, if there is no preaching of a dead-and-risen Jew on a particular Sunday outside of Jerusalem for MY sins, just what is it about that church which makes it Christian? For that matter, why do we call it a church instead of a theater or stadium or lecture hall or club? If Christ is absent, and all we’re really doing is repackaging “how great I am” one more time so that I can encourage myself to please some generic ‘god’, why even attend? I can get that on the radio. As a matter of fact, I’d argue that you can get much better from the likes of Zig Ziglar and Tony Robbins! If I want self-help, I’ll go to that section of the bookstore, thank you very much. And we haven’t even gotten to the churches which have fallen into the traps of the ancient heresies.

Why do you think when I’m considering attending a church after relocating from one home to another that I quickly corner the pastor and assault him with, “What do you confess here?” And I say it in a way that makes them come up with a real answer, like right now. If you go all “car-salesman-y” on me, avoid answering my question and start talking about your great church programs and all the wonderful things you make available for children, etc., I’m out of here. The answer to my question is simple and quick. It’s a no-brainer for a Christian church. (And it must be backed up by Gospel-focused preaching from the pulpit. It’s small consolation if you’re liturgical yet spend half an hour not preaching about Christ and His atoning sacrifice for me.) I don’t have the time for more worldly Christless garbage. I need my faith fed.

Can’t deliver? Buh-bye! (Imagine a screeching of car tires out of the parking lot!)

It takes a special level of misguidedness to condemn people for leaving a church which (following the statistics) is not likely to even be Christian, and particularly if you haven’t even taken the time to hear their story about why they’re leaving. (Just listen to the stories of those heading out the door and you’ll quickly find out.)

So, here are the questions with which I leave you. Have you found out just what it is someone is leaving when they decide to leave a “church”? Did you ever consider that, too often, in leaving the “church” he or she was attending, someone may have just taken an initial step TOWARDS Christianity? Was there anything said in the church they just left which couldn’t be said in a Mormon stake?

And finally, for the many who are struggling in their church and faith… if you find that all this subject matter pokes right at the heart of the struggles you’ve been having in your church, regardless of which denomination you’re in, and no one else is addressing it, please listen to Dr. Rosenbladt’s “The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church”. He wrote it just for you. It’s now FREE.

Listen to it. Now!

(Listen to “The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church” for FREE.)

By Ted R

The Weekly Word

Thursday, August 12th, 2010

Bread LoavesWelcome to another installment of The Weekly Word, our effort to highlight Gospel-centered preaching from Lutheran pulpits. With vacation schedules this summer, we’ve gotten behind in posting these. But we’ll catch up quickly! You can always follow the links we post to the home page where these audio files are located.

The lesson in this sermon comes from Romans 8.

Sermon – Sunday, July 25, 2010

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download MP3
Visit all First Lutheran sermons

By Ted R

A Jarring Contrast

Tuesday, August 10th, 2010

We saw this YouTube clip.  It is a jarring contrast, and it gives rise on the one hand a deep sorrow and shame at what the church has become in some quarters, and joyous hope on the other hand for the future of Lutheran Christianity.

By Pat K

Lit2Go On iTunes U

Thursday, July 29th, 2010

University of South Florida - Lit2GoRegretfully, I’ve never been as avid a reader as I now wish I’d been, and I think I should have been. Reading has always taken me more effort than most, it seems.

I don’t know how many people out there are like me, but I suspect there are many around my age range (late thirties, early forties). People like me grew up surrounded by the computer revolution, starting with TV and quickly moving to video games and a flood of gorgeous movies – which also were suddenly available at home with the advent of the VHS tape.

It was the beginning of a constant barrage of visual and audible media. But it was only a contributing factor to my lack of desire in reading and in books. There were a lot of other parts which summed up to the total struggle I had in gaining any desire to read.

But every once in a while something in the new techologies which are now part of our daily lives rises above the din to make it possible for people like me to play catch up a little bit and hopefully make it a bit easier to fall in love with something as I never did.

I’m sure many of you have heard of, or use regularly, iTunes U, made available through Apple. I’ve been delving in to it over time to see what gems might be lying around in there. If you haven’t heard of it, it is a resource of growing and inestimable value. It is a place where you can find educational resources – typically audio ones – which you can use to study in your off time. And best of all… FOR FREE!

And what do I mean by “off time”? How many hours to you spend commuting to and from work? How many hours do you spend doing other things like working out or doing chores around the house or running errands? How many things do you do during the day where you’ve found that you have time to turn on your MP3 listening device and use it to fill the time?

This is where iTunes U really shines. In particular, I ran across a resource that I now understand many others know about, but I’m pretty certain many others don’t. It is simply a glorious example of what is available in the iTunes U catalog.

The University of South Florida (USF) has made available a program called “Lit2Go”. What is it? Classic literature made available directly online to read in your browser, but also in PDF (for printing) and MP3 format. Have you ever wanted to read (for the first time, or second, or whatever Nth time it may be for you) stories like:

  • The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (or Tom Sawyer)
  • The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes
  • Alice in Wonderland
  • Treasure Island
  • Wuthering Heights
  • Uncle Tom’s Cabin
  • Peter Pan
  • Oliver Twist
  • The Last of the Mohicans
  • Hamlet
  • Dracula
  • David Copperfield

…and many more. Unbelievable! Because you can simply download the MP3s for free and listen to them in your off time. Just put them on your iPod or MP3 listening device and you’re off and running. Or you can drop them into iTunes and burn audio CDs for your car.

Anyway, this is a free resource, and we gain nothing by sharing it. But you could gain much. Don’t miss out on this. You have no reason not to. You certainly can’t beat the price.

You can visit Lit2Go directly at the USF website, or visit it through iTunes (search for Lit2Go in iTunes and go to the University of South Florida link to find the Lit2Go link).

There’s much more to be had at iTunes U. If you find any other worthy resources there, be sure to post them in the comments here for others.

By Ted R

Is the Liturgy Vain Repetition?

Tuesday, July 27th, 2010

My favorite martial art is Aikido. It is very subtle yet powerful. The art consists of a series of joint locks and throwing techniques that rely on proper balance and movement in conjunction with precise timing. It takes a very long time to become proficient at it. Years longer than other martial arts. Practice consists of repeating the basic movements over and over, until they become second nature, then putting the various movements together in sequence and trying to time it just right. It is a painstaking process that takes years. The end result is breathtaking when you see it performed by a master. They will often defeat multiple opponents attacking all at once and can effortlessly subdue much larger attackers. Not many people attain such proficiency though. The repetitive and mundane nature of the practice discourages the less committed.

In various quarters of the internet and occasionally on blogs I frequent, I will hear a particular criticism of the historic liturgy proffered as a serious argument against its use in the church. It is the charge that the liturgy is vain repetition, and that people are bored with it or “just don’t get anything out of it.”

Instead of engaging on several different blogs and forums, this post will be my public response, much like my previous post on infant baptism.

So, is the liturgy vain repetition? The short answer is no.

My previous pastor was confronted with this question one time and in turn asked the person how they ever learned anything deeply without repetition. Most important things in life are learned through repetition, and the more we do it the better we get. This is the entire premise of Malcom Gladwell’s book, ‘Outliers.’ (Gladwell’s research show that it takes ten thousand hours to hone your skill or talent to be world class.)

Underneath the accusation of vain repetition lies the assumption that as soon as someone is born again they are naturally and automatically able to worship and don’t really need any more than a few cursory pointers and any systematic approach to learning how to worship God may be dispensed with. Given the depth of our sin and the general ignorance in the church concerning the scriptures, this is neither a wise nor safe assumption to make.

A second underlying assumption is that when we have heard something once, or even just a couple times, that we totally understand it and grasp all it’s implications, and therefore have no need of hearing it again, at least any time soon. This is easily proven false by asking average Christians to recite and explain the Ten Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer, or the Apostle’s Creed. Be honest, do you remember your Pastor’s sermon from two weeks ago? This kind of attitude makes us consumers of ideas, collectors of bits and pieces of the scriptures, not disciples longing to fully grasp Jesus’ teaching.

How are we to pass on the faith and inculcate it deeply into our children when what we do every week changes based on the whims of the pastor?

Several pastors I know have been at the bedsides of dying parishioners who were totally unresponsive to family members and doctors. When the pastors sang or recited the liturgy they noticed the parishioners mouthing the words to the Lord’s prayer or other parts of the liturgy. This kind of thing comes from deep learning and years of recitation, not glossing over different musical choruses every week.

I have been a Lutheran for twenty years, and finally got to the point a few years ago where I could worship on Sunday morning and not need to look at the hymnal. Once I got to that point, worship was almost a whole new experience for me. I could sing and recite God’s word back to Him in unison with the whole congregation, and not have to hold a hymnal (except for some hymns) or a bulletin.

Another problem with the accusation of vain repetition is that the liturgy is almost entirely taken from Scripture. In worship, how do you vainly repeat Scripture? Is it vain repetition when we read various passages of Scripture or even the entire Bible over and over again? No. God’s word is rich and deep and the Holy Spirit applies the word anew every day. You will never entirely grasp the meaning of a passage of Scripture and exhaust its future value. How many of us have participated in systematic memorization of the Bible?

Given the sad state of biblical literacy in the church, you would think more churches would be considering some kind regular and repeated recitation of various passages of scripture.

As to the charge of being boring and ‘not getting anything out of it’ these problems lie with the hearer, not the liturgy. Basically they are saying they are bored with the Scriptures, and/or are not getting the emotional lift they had hoped for. These are the bleatings of a generation raised on TV and the internet, trained by these mediums to have an attention span measured in seconds.

Much of ‘contemporary worship’ follows a liturgy of sorts. I can walk into a Vineyard Church, or a Calvary Chapel and tell you exactly where in the worship service they are without looking at a bulletin. Although the form may be the same week to week in these churches, the content is different every week and precludes deep learning on the part of the members unless they are very self motivated. Contemporary evangelical worship often mimics one of our culture’s premier entertainment venues: the rock concert. It is something to ponder. When our worship mimics entertainment, it can only lead to disaster.

A side note to my Lutheran brothers and sisters. Contrary to the assertions of some Lutherans, it is not possible to pour Lutheran content into these other forms of worship. Chaplain Mike over at Internetmonk.com recently reviewed Cole Smith’s new book,‘A Lover’s Quarrel with the Evangelical Church.’ and wrote this:

Rejecting the long understood fact that “the medium is the message”, evangelicalism has adopted the philosophy that any means is OK as long as one is communicating the right message. However, as Smith observes, “When you change the medium, you change the message, whether you intend to or not and though the words remain exactly the same. It is a lesson the evangelical church has not yet learned.”

Many Lutherans will learn this the hard way. The evangelicals are learning it now. When you reject the historic forms of worship that are based on the Scriptures and hammered out by the church over centuries, not only are you destined to ‘reinvent the wheel’, so to speak, but you risk compromising the essence of Christian worship.

By Pat K

A Culture of Guilt

Monday, July 26th, 2010

For a while now I have noticed a trend among the customers I deal with at my day job.  It would be one thing if these incidents were sporadic, only happening every few days or less, but they happen many times every day.

Every day I receive unsolicited apologies from customers because they have failed to bring in their eco-friendly reusable bags to bag up the items they purchase from the company I work for.  Some of them will even punish themselves by refusing the offer of a bag (we have far more than enough for every customer) and carry all their items to their cars in their arms.  Others will digress into a confession about their failure to recycle at home.  I hear this sometimes six or eight times a day if I happen to be working the registers on a given day.

For my part, I never ask anyone if they have brought their own bags, I never deliberately engage them on the subject of recycling or in any way reference their own perceived crime. They just start talking and this stuff comes out. Mostly it is women who engage in this self flagellation, but I hear it from a fair percentage of men also.

It has become so tiresome that my standard reply is, “Don’t have ‘bag guilt.’ Paper is a renewable resource.”

I hear whispers of other kinds of politically-correct guilt in conversations among my customers and co-workers.  Owning or driving a big car or truck is high on the list of things people are ashamed of.

Maybe it is because I live in California that I am exposed to so much of this stuff.

I find it ironic that the secular culture often imitates the worst guilt inducing ‘motivational techniques’ of the evangelical church and some of its more colorful evangelists.  If you don’t believe me, listen to a pledge drive for a PBS radio or TV station.  They have taken a page out of the old tent revival playbook.

The list of sins is relatively new.  The guilt is the same old stuff though.  It is amazing to me that people so easily and willingly take on this kind of guilt and feel the need to confess it to a total stranger.  Our news and entertainment media groom people to accept this guilt and then use it as a handle for their advertisers or to affect political change.

Next time you are out in public, listen closely to the bits and pieces of conversations that you overhear, and pay attention to your interactions with strangers, and see if you can pick up the same thing.  I would be interested to hear your comments.

By Pat K

Our Friend Frank Dent Reviews Michael Spencer’s Mere Churchianity

Tuesday, July 20th, 2010

Mere ChurchianityOur Friend Frank Dent has written an in depth review Of our friend Michael Spencer’s bookWe think our readers will find it compelling, and we urge you to buy the book and read it for yourselves.

Mere Michael Spencer A personal review of Mere Churchianity, by Michael Spencer (Waterbrook Press, 2010)

“For many of you, leaving the church may have been the most spiritually healthy thing you ever did.”

Michael Spencerʼs new book, Mere Churchianity, is all about me. That claim may well appear presumptuous since I never met Mr. Spencer, but Iʼm certain I wonʼt be alone in that perspective. I call this a “personal review” of Mere Churchianity because the book is such an authentic recounting of my personal experience that I canʼt help but see myself on nearly every page, and Iʼm convinced that a large number of American Christians who read it will, each and every one of them, be convinced the book was modeled on their personal experience. For those readers who are perfectly happy in their church home, this book may be a revelation to you. For those who have been awakened to the flight of Christians from the church, this book is the single best perspective from both inside and outside the church available. This is such a disturbingly accurate portrayal of what is happening to people who canʼt find Jesus in church that it invites a host of corroborating evidence as well as signaling a new focus for traditional, orthodox and confessional churches that have not succumbed to the Church Growth Movementʼs glossy borchures. Ordinarily, were this book to receive the reading it deserves, we should be expecting an equally insightful follow-up from Mr. Spencer in a few years. However, the God from whom all blessings flow will allow that book, if it ever comes, to be written by someone else, for Michael Spencer died of cancer before this painfully truthful challenge to American Christianity reached bookstores. We have his keenly insightful and plain spoken assessment of the church in America today to take to heart and use as a rallying point for a church of rediscovered mission and renewed vigor, and for that we are truly blessed by Mr. Spencerʼs wit, humility, restless mind, and boundless joy in living in Christ.

Mere Churchianity lines up very neatly with a number of topics that are in the air at the moment, topics that I associate with a renewed interest in Reformation theology and the confessional church. In fact, Spencerʼs book is so on-target for those of us “broken by the church,” as Dr. Rod Rosenbladt defined the experience years ago, that it canʼt help but reach a wide audience among Christians who have observed with dread the growing shadow of “churchianity,” or the natural outcome of Church Growth Movement strategies and the unthinking emphasis on the felt needs of the seeker, that has decimated a number of main-line Protestant denominations. Dr. Rosenbladtʼs address, “The Gospel for Those Broken by the Church,” works as a perfect prologue to Spencerʼs book, introducing us to the phenomenon of the “alumni of the church.” The sad alumni first “came to believe that the cross of Christ was their salvation. For free. And forever.” And then a transformation in the understanding of the Gospel began to take place which put these sad alumni on the path to walking away from the church, namely a misapplication of what Reformation Churches refer to as the “third use of the law.” Dr. Rosenbladt tells us that, when handled properly, the third use of the law provides us with plenty to consider as we contemplate how God would have us live our daily lives. When mishandled, the third use of the law can eventually destroy faith by fanning a growing disheartenment at the unattainable perfection of Christian living.

The “mad alumni” join the flight from the church from a different experience. For the mad ones, Christianity was supposed to make their lives better, more fulfilling, while their marriage and family relations would be more joyful, their careers would experience new growth, financial security would be at hand, and their lives would be overflowing with blessings. Or something like that. And, they bought into it. But, when these benefits didnʼt begin to flow into their lives, their marriages, their careers, and their bank accounts, the misapplication of the third use of the law told them that they simply werenʼt doing Christianity right. They needed to pray more, read the Bible more, attend church services more, and be more active in church ministries. The mad ones come to realize that they are so deeply invested in church that there isnʼt anything of the Gospel left and there simply isnʼt any hope of ever getting Christianity right. Unlike the despondent sad alumni, the mad alumni will reject the church and the Gospel, as well as any and all other religions, completely and resolutely.

Mere Churchianity picks up Dr. Rosenbladtʼs warning here to chronicle the paths taken by those who eventually become “leavers” or “quitters” in Spencerʼs terminology. Whereas Dr. Rosenbladtʼs address is a cautionary one that presents a compelling and heartrending picture of the reverse flow of “broken Christians” leaving the church, Spencerʼs task is to, by personal example, draw each one of us into committing to finding ways to un-do the devastation done to church-broken Christians. These are not academic musings or intellectual baubles from either of these two men, although both would be well-equipped for such a task. But, rather, both speak from personal experience, Dr. Rosenbladt from a pietistic Lutheran background and Spencer from a life of hacking away at the extraneous distractions that cloak historic, orthodox Christianity from the American seeker. Both present to us men so moved by what they see that they donʼt simply weep over the broken Bride of Christ but actively flag down all passersby to assist in lifting the church back up. Further, both zoom in on the misapplication of the third use of the law as a major contributor, despite the wildly disproportionate growth of a few mega-churches, to the current exodus of American Christians from the church.

There is another reference that must be made here to Michael Spencerʼs book, one that is clearly signaled by its title, Mere Churchianity. Although Spencer makes no self- conscious reference to C.S. Lewisʼ towering Mere Christianity, by the bookʼs very name it claims the legacy of the earlier work. I can see some critics stumbling over this claim to Lewisʼ legacy and that would prevent them from assessing Spencerʼs book in an even-handed manner. And yet, there it is. In fact, one would be hard pressed to identify any other common English word that would so readily draw an association with a great work in the Christian idiom quite as forcefully as the word “mere.” I suggest that the use of the word is warranted, not as a direct correlation of Spencer to Lewis but, rather, as a signal of how Spencerʼs book intends to address the American church and Christians as he finds them in his day as a deliberate counterpart to how Lewisʼ book addressed the English church and the Christians he found in his.

I left the church for the first time at my earliest opportunity, which was upon leaving home for college. Only a few years later, I was intellectually exhausted from the adrenaline rush of discovering one venerable and wholly new religious tradition, spiritual discipline, or life-affirming worldview after another, from East to West and from mysticism to fundamentalism. Certainly, my experience the first time I read C.S. Lewisʼs Mere Christianity thirty-five years ago was very personal as I then would certainly have identified myself among the half-persuaded that Lewis is speaking to in such good- natured tones and with such unflinching reason.

I consider Mere Christianity and Mere Churchianity to be like mirror images of each other. They share the same desire to affirm the historic, orthodox essence of our faith. Both present their case in a manner that is straight-forward, and never takes an officious or scolding tone. Both appeal to the native common sense of their audience, Lewis originally in a collection of radio addresses to a nation at war, and Spencer in an equally inclusive but distinctly 21st Century American style perfected from years in youth ministry, Christian classroom teaching, and blogging to the great, wide world of all comers. Lewis abandons all the brilliant rhetoric of the Oxford don, his accustomed setting, in order to speak directly and simply as though over a pint at the local pub, while Spencer abandons the church-speak of the clergyman or teacher to wrap his insightful message in the plain-spoken wit and wry world-weariness of, say, Will Rogers. Being a native Oklahoman myself, it is not a comparison I make lightly.

As much as Lewis has done to get people into the church over the last couple of generations Spencer is trying to accomplish in providing a church that will bring Christians back, and this is where the mirror-backward dissimilarities of the two books come to the forefront. Lewis witnessed the attacks on the Church that became the intellectual environment in Europe following World War I, he understood the underpinnings of these movements, and knew where they were weakest and where they posed the greatest threat. The radio addresses that formed the nucleus for Mere Christianity were broadcast during the dark days of World War II, when the Nazi Luftwaffe bombed London nightly and the hope of the English people was placed on the shoulders of a greatly outnumbered and out-gunned Royal Air Force. In the intellectual whirl-wind of war and the hardscrabble years of post-war recovery, Lewis called the English people back to the well-spring of faith in the God of all Creation and in the miracle of the substitutionary death of his Son on the Cross for all the sins of the world. He defended his English church against all intellectual counterfeits of Truth and labored to present the essentials of the historic, orthodox Christian faith in a way that would prevent his apologetic from being derailed by what he might consider the minority voice of dogma or denominational differences.

Spencer witnessed all the attacks on the church during his day, many from the zeitgeist of the post-modern world, but the most alarming from within the church itself. Spencer describes a Bride of Christ that has willingly submitted itself to an extreme makeover and the result is not the liberation of the churchʼs eternal mission but, instead, the trivialization of the Gospel under layers and layers of seeker sensitive narcissism and emerging church ambiguity. Spencer is not calling more people to this impostor of the Bride of Christ but is calling all of us to figure out what to do with all the “leavers,” all the sad and mad alumni of the church, to turn us back to the cross. However, Spencer is not a revolutionary. I think he believed that the contemporary Protestant church in America was collapsing under its own weight and needs no help from us. But the leavers do need our help.

But, Iʼm not writing to church members who are happy where theyʼre at or to Christians who are heavily invested in the success and propagation of the church as an organization. Iʼm writing instead to those who may still be associated with the church but no longer buy into much of what the church says. Not because they doubt the reality of God, but because they doubt that the church is really representing Jesus.

This quote from Mere Churchianity underscores what is perhaps the biggest single difference between Lewis and Spencer, and in fact the greatest single difference between the church of C.S. Lewis and the church of Michael Spencer. Lewis would argue, in mid-20th century England, that the church was precisely the place where anyone grappling with the questions of human life should be, that it was exactly within the church that we would find the forum where we can hear the words of eternal life and we can come to trust Jesus as “the way, the truth, and the life.” Spencer declares that such a church no longer exists or, if it does, it exists in small, isolated pockets or in churches who managed to stay on the sidelines during the Church Growth craze. His is not the cautionary warning of some calamity that may occur if we continue on our heedless path. No, Spencer tells us that the Evangelical church of post-World War II America has come and has gone. The church in Spencerʼs book no longer represents Jesus to American culture. Heʼs not urging us to fix it. Itʼs too late for that. What we should be about, however, is learning to walk alongside the mad/sad leavers of the church so that a renewed evangelicalism, a revitalized faith, and a reborn church can begin to thrive right beside the old, dead one.

Spencer uses, to good effect, some recurring themes, such as “Jesus-shaped spirituality,” the “lie” of Christian adjectives (“good Christian,” “successful Christian life,” “dynamic Christian living,” etc.), the promotion of a kind of “unscripted life,” the “free- range believer,” and a kind of “self-induced feelgoodism” that characterizes churchianity. At the center of Spencerʼs discontent with the Church is a deep yearning to know Jesus, along with a grave spiritual disquiet resulting from going to church to find Jesus only to discover that Jesus isnʼt there. “Here is the truth,” writes Spencer, “Far from being Jesus-shaped Christians, we were church shaped. In fact, we were deniers of Jesus. We were frighteningly close to being Judas.”

Lewisʼ greatest asset in Mere Christianity was his ability to soften the shadow cast by his towering intellect to become “one of us” that we might hear the direct, plain-spoken truth of Godʼs plan for restoring the broken relationship between the Creator and his creation, and so we might sense the great depth of Lewisʼ personal trust in what he so keenly wanted us to know about God. Spencer doesnʼt have the baggage of Oxford and the reputation of the brilliant scholar of Renaissance and Medieval literature to overcome, and is quick to establish his full association with and membership in good standing in the human race of the early 21st century American variety, and from this leads us candidly and unabashedly into a life lived humbly before God. Yet, Spencerʼs book is no less orderly or carefully constructed as that of the great scholar, but the architecture of his thought is less apparent than Lewisʼ and often concealed behind the easy presentation of a natural conversationalist. It is this natural conveyance of penetrating questions buoyed effortlessly along by the ebb and flow of conversation that engages the reader and holds oneʼs mind and heart captive as Spencer makes relentless assault on his key themes. Where Lewis is an affable uncle you enjoyed badgering with questions at family gatherings, Spencer is the cousin who got you in trouble with some fireworks at church camp and then talked excitedly with you all night after lights-out about 1 Peter 1:24-25. This is but a sample of the rigor of thought and highly accessible language that characterizes this book:

If you have left the church or are headed for the door, there is a strong possibility that you have to leave in order to hold on to your integrity. You realized you can no longer play the religion game. You may be playing other games — Iʼm not letting any of us off the hook. But you found you could no longer be party to the endless act that says you are living the victorious Christian life.

Mere Churchianity is an important book. I would encourage any Christian, regardless of current church circumstances or prior experience, to read it. Read it, give copies away to people at church, or other Christians you know, and find other people who have read it, or who have tuned into some of these same ideas that are currently in the air, and take its message to heart. More than that, do something. Subvert the vernacular of church-speak within your fellowship with some challenges to discover Jesus-shaped spirituality. As you read Mere Churchianity, I am confident that you will arrive at some of the same observations that I did about the book, about the bookʼs key themes, and about Michael Spencer.

First, you will discover that Spencer is not above being provocative. Not the cheap, controversial book-jacket claims that weʼre used to seeing emblazoned across books targeted at Christians. No, I mean the kind of provocation that comes from somebody who knows you as well as you do, refuses to see you get spiritually flabby and self- contented, is willing to shock you back into consciousness, and loves you like a brother through it all. In short, Michael Spencer will say anything. Hereʼs a sampling:

“The exhausting effort to be a good Christian denies Christ. If you insist on securing your own holiness and acceptability, you disqualify yourself from seeing anything from Jesus. He came to earth to save sinners, not good Christians.”

“I realize that my using the expression Jesus-shaped spirituality as a way to recalibrate the Christian message runs the risk of sliding into the Christian-terminology sinkhole and never coming out. As with most things in the alternate world of Christian culture, my personal sympathies are firmly planted on both sides of this divide. You have to be careful where you point that spirituality thing, because it has the potential to grant legitimacy to all kinds of people who have nothing more interesting to say than ʻworship yourself.ʼ On the other hand, if the pursuit of spirituality gets away from the problems so many people have with the church and allows us to talk about our experience of God and where it comes from, Iʼm all for it.”

“I understand that Christians need — desperately — to hear experiential testimonies of the power of the gospel. I understand as well that itʼs not pleasant to hear that we are broken and are going to stay that way. I know there will be little enthusiasm for saying sanctification consists, in large measure, in seeing our sin and acknowledging how deeply and extensively it has marred us. No triumphalist will agree that the fight of faith is not a victory party but a bloody war on a battlefield that resembles Omaha Beach. But, thatʼs the way it is. Iʼm right on this one.”

You will find yourself both outraged and gladdened. For example, “Evangelicalism has become the sworn enemy of biblical Christianity. Instead, itʼs more like a fraternal lodge with its own language, rules, requirements, rituals, and secret handshake.” I read this and thought, “Atta boy, Mike!” But, I also read a defense of William Youngʼs The Shack on the grounds that we need to be more attuned to seeing God as a “loving, tender, attentive, gracious Father,” and I couldnʼt help but respond, “Oh, please, Mr. Spencer! The Shack? Seriously?” As superb conversationalist, Spencer is a fisher of men. In conversation, he might cast a hook using some outrageous statement as bait. Once the bait is taken he can easily back-fill your outrage with a different approach, another perspective, a second analogy. The provocation is forgotten and, unaware of the process, you find yourself lying helplessly in Spencerʼs boat. In his world, and regardless of the personal tone of much his appeal, Spencer is not the center. Jesus is. Provocation can help focus the mind on that center quite nicely when used as masterfully as Spencer does.

Secondly, you will discover a fresh voice to add to the list of “most quotable authors” in the popular Christian idiom. I think G.K. Chesterton must top the list as the most maddeningly quotable of all Christian writers. One of my favorite Chesterton quotes is from The Ball and The Cross, “The police have their faults, but thank God, theyʼre inefficient.” And, of course, Tolkien lovers can recite whole pages of quote-worthy prose from The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion. Lewis has sprinkled epigrams and life-lessons throughout his fiction, essays, and autobiographical works. Dorothy L. Sayers places many gems on the lips of her aristocratic detective, Lord Peter Wimsey. But, Michael Spencerʼs quotable lines are of more serious purpose. He wishes to say things in a way that may convey a familiar idea but he says it in a way to shock us into paying attention. Here is a sampling of “Spencerisms” from Mere Churchianity:

“Discipleship is a call to me, but it is a journey of ʻwe.ʼ”

“[Religion] claims to have something astonishing: God on call and spirituality in the warehouse.”

“My project to clean out my God closet and start over with the essentials leads me to Jesus Christ, Godʼs ultimate and amazing self-description.”

“North American Christianity may have the distinction of having promised more of God and delivered less of God than any single act on the stage of church history.”

And there are many, many more, practically one on every page. This embarrassment of riches makes the book both a joy to discover and an enduring source of timeless Christian expression.

The third thing you are likely to discover about Michael Spencer is how very much you miss him. Not in a maudlin way, for we do not despair of death. Michaelʼs faith, our Christian faith, prepares us for death, this most unnatural and personal assault of the darkness that came with a fallen creation. No, it is the kind of emptiness we all feel when weʼve shared a portion of our life with someone whose force of personality made us look at ourselves and our relationship to others and to our Creator in a very different and boldly invigorating way, never to be repeated. If you have this experience, donʼt keep it to yourself. I think that Michael Spencer would want us to be up and about, filled with a Jesus-shaped spirituality, not paralyzed with remorse for the past, but out in the world, vibrantly aware Whose we are and what He has done for us. “For free. And forever.”

By Pat K

Our Fine Art At Imagekind

Saturday, July 10th, 2010

Geneva Woodcut - detail 2For some time now we’ve had our hands on some old woodcuts which we originally made available directly through our catalog. A while back, though, we moved them over to a third party solution, Imagekind by CafePress.

I wanted to mention this because I was prompted by someone recently to send a link to our Imagekind account so they could get one of these pieces, only to discover that for some reason our account didn’t work. Well, I went back and forth with Imagekind, and they got the problem cleared up.

So, I don’t know how long this has been going on or how many of you it affected, but I wanted to highlight these art pieces again now that all is running smoothly. (The art pieces I’m talking about are highlighted in the right side column of this blog, and we’ve had that link up for months.)

Just to give you an idea of the history behind how we acquired these woodcuts, they were gifts from a friend. A friend of ours was studying for his doctorate out in Oxford, England, and had a habit of getting himself in situations where he could pick up old art like these woodcuts. These two were a couple of them and they were created in the late 19th century and printed at around the turn of the 20th century.

As we were working to get NRP up and running on the platform we’re now using for our store, our friend was kind enough to let us scan these prints and make them available to our customers. So we found some folks who were able to scan them at full size at a high resolution. The size and detail of the originals is astounding and we wanted to offer them for sale only if we could maintain the quality of the originals. (I am posting a couple images here in this post from the “Geneva” piece to give you an idea of the level of detail contained in each woodcut.)

Geneva Woodcut - detail 1The first piece is called “Geneva” for the depicted location. It is a fictional gathering featuring a who’s who from the theological and philosophical circles of the Reformation which began in the 16th century with Martin Luther. We’ve tried to make clear to people that the original we scanned to make this available is big! It measures almost three and a half feet wide. But one of the benefits of Imagekind is that you can now get a smaller version of it as well.

Secondly, we have the “Diet of Spires” piece. This piece depicts the German nobles gathered at Spires in order to protest the edict under which they had been placed prohibiting the dissemination of the rediscovered Gospel of justification in St. Paul. Featured in the piece you will find both Martin Luther and Philipp Melanchthon.

We’re looking forward to making more artwork available, both old treasures as we find them, as well as some of our own new photography. We will update you when we add more to our Imagekind account.

In the mean time, please visit the pages for these two fine art works where you will find more historical information for each one than I’ve mentioned here. I hope you like them. We can’t say enough good things about them and we know you’ll be pleased when you have one on your desk or wall.

By Ted R

Dr. Montgomery On Issues, Etc.

Wednesday, July 7th, 2010

Issues, Etc.Dr. John Warwick Montgomery covers several subjects for an hour on Issues, Etc., including Glenn Beck, Mormonism, David Barton and American History. Stop by and listen to the podcast from Tuesday, July 6, and specifically the first hour, in which Dr. Montgomery is featured.

By Ted R