Following the attacks on New York and Washington D.C. and the failed attack that ended in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, many Americans darkened the doors of our churches, some for the first time in years. Now, as far as I am aware, church attendance has returned to pre-September 11 levels. Maybe it returned to those levels in 2002, I’m not sure.
This morning, I heard a good message from an Army general about the state of the world today, specifically related to radical Islam, and what Christians can do about it, if anything. He briefly mentioned that he wished more Americans would go to church in light of the Barna survey stating 84% of us claim to be Christians. But I suggest that many have gone to American churches and found no reason to return. What they found was self-referential moralism and messages on God helping those who help themselves or on love without morality being the path to true peace. Hope from the Creator of the world and Redeemer of the forgiven they did not find. They can get the self-help on their own.
A self-referential faith will not offer lasting hope. It will not understand how men can do evil things, and when faced with rage, addiction, adultery, and greed, it will offer only platitudes or rejection. It will not believe in the supernatural enemy we face, the Morgoth/Sauron-type character who stalks the earth looking for those who will believe his lies, those who will look inward and blame others for their pain or disappointment.
I fear this is the message many churches communicate in and out of the pulpit, even churches in which there are many genuine believers. They have missed the life-transforming gospel by focusing on their own efforts to better themselves and the world (thus the affection many have for political success). In doing so, they will tell non-believers that God will not accept them until they clean themselves up. They say they don’t care how broken or sinful they are, they had better present themselves as clean in church or God won’t accept them. Of course, God the Father, who knows everything from begin to end, will not reject the sick or the broken, the abusive or the abused. He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins when we repent of them, even when we repeatedly repent of them.
I wish it were true that 84% of Americans were genuine believers, but I’m afraid they claim that label out of mere cultural comfort, and if these are the ones going to 60-70% of American churches, I don’t worry that many people stopped after the fear of the attacks diminished. Perhaps there were a couple rescuers inside those frames meant at one time to reflect the glory of a greater kingdom, but maybe they had left too, tired of finding people who were unwilling to be saved.
The gospel is what our churches are meant to preach. It is not merely a pass for the bad stuff we do or a term for our 12 step self-help guide; it is divine liberation from the crushing bonds of sin and a new life of service on the Lord’s estate. The Lord asks us to believe who he claims to be in the Bible and live accordingly, grieving past failure, embracing future grace.
Phil, I need to take umbrage with your statement that the Gospel is all that should be preached. We need both Law and Gospel.
In my Lutheran circles, we generally refer to all Protestant churches who are not Lutheran as Reformed. Of course that’s using the term in a very broad sense. However, it does seem to be indicative of much of the preaching I hear or read. It’s all about reforming behavior – how to live happy, honest, upright lives.
On the other hand, early theologians, Reformed and Lutheran alike looked at the law differently. It was described with three uses,
1. A Curb – The threat of punishment keeps me from harming my neighbor.
2. A Mirror – Clearly defining right and wrong helps me see my own sin and my need of a savior, driving me to Christ.
3. A Guide – It shows me how to love God with my heart, soul, mind and strength and love my neighbor as myself.
Another Lutheran tradition is the proper distinction of Law and Gospel. Many messages I hear are either all Law, what we must do, or all Gospel, what God has done. However, we cannot appreciate the good news of the Gospel that God offers forgiveness and reconciliation through faith in Jesus Christ until the Law has done its work of convincing us of our sinfulness, that God would be right and just to send us away from his presence for eternity and that we have no hope of achieving righteousness in our own power.
Another error, beyond neglecting either Law or Gospel is the misapplication or mingling of Law and Gospel where Law is presented as Gospel (Good News! You can have a happy marriage in ten easy steps.) or Gospel is presented as Law (Such as Puritan laws requiring church membership of all citizens).
Nothing like 84% of Americans believe in a personal God with His own reality and demands. Maybe that many believe in a kind of theism that’s distinguishable from pure materialism, and believe that some variation on a Judeo-Christian code is better than pure lawlessness or amorality.
Greybeard, I can’t disagree, but I haven’t been to seminary and I’m sure as * not a Lutheran (which I say in love of course), so maybe I used different words. I think what you said is good. It sounds to me like the gospel in context.
Phil, One problem here may be a range of definitions that are applied to the word Gospel. In a wide sense it is applied to mean all the teachings of Scripture. But in a narrow sense it is used to describe the saving work of God in Christ. What I was decrying was the common practice of focusing on the narrow definition to the exclusion of the broader use.
Used properly, inherent within the Gospel message of good news that there is salvation available to all through faith in Jesus Christ is the implication of the bad news that without Jesus we are lost. Whenever we try to deny the lostness of man without Jesus, the message of the Gospel is subtly or not so subtly changed so that salvation from sin and its consequences becomes salvation from something else.
Good word, sir.