First, before you read this post and certainly before you comment, go back and at least read The Old Limbo Crossroads, to get some background. It’s better if you’re new to this blog to get completely caught up by reading What’s Going On, but the previous Crossroads is really the bare minimum.
Okay, now on to the topic at hand, which is Evangelical Christianity.
I grew up Mormon, but I grew up in East Tennessee, which means that most of my peers were Evangelical Christians of some kind. Most of my close friends were nonreligious or Roman Catholic, but most of the Christianity that I was exposed to in my formative years was evangelical.
In particular, I had one really good evangelical friend whose name was Brock. We had kind of a common understanding that meant we didn’t try to convert each other, but through him I was exposed to a lot of the people that he went to church with. This exposure was often limited, but it was significant: these were people who really believed in Jesus Christ, who lived Christ-centered lives, and who were happy about it. You could see it in their faces, that Jesus Christ had made a difference. It was something that I did not see in my fellow Mormons, and it was something that stuck with me and was not easy to reconcile, even on my mission. I often thought back to these people and wondered how, if the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints was really Christ’s church on earth, how these non-members could be so obviously and vibrantly Christian.
As I served my mission, my understanding of Jesus Christ developed and it drifted towards a more full understanding of grace, one which I inevitably had to try to reconcile with Mormonism (and I did it by constantly revising the Gospel According To Kullervo). Most of the doubts I had about Mormonism were laced with Evangelical concerns. My personal understanding of Jesus Christ ultimately developed into something very Protestant, with Mormonism’s specific practices and odd doctrinal quirks pretty much tacked on to the side.
Thus, last year when I finally started giving serious voice to my doubts about Mormonism, it was because I increasingly saw Mormonism as something that did not match my understanding of Jesus Christ, the Bible, and what I thought Christianity was all about.
Granted, leaving Mormonism ultimately led me to have to seriously examine, and in the end dig up and re-plant, my belief in Jesus Christ and in God. But I feel at this point that I have come full circle and I am now back in a place where I can state without (much) reservation that I believe in Jesus and I want to follow him.
Anyway, because of all of this, Evangelical Christianity is attractive to me. I have very little interest in theological liberalism (a topic that I will address in a future post), and reading some of the writers in the Emergent conversation (Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, Donald Miller) within Evangelical Christianity has done a great deal to resolve many of my major theological concerns, showing me that I actually can be an Evangelical Christian without being a mindless fundamentalist or a rabid Republican. It has all been extremely compelling.
Right now my family is attending Cedar Ridge Community Church, which is a kind of emergent Evangelical nondenominational church, and it’s a really good place. It has a lot going for it. I agree with everything they preach form the pulpit, but in a way that challenges me instead of leaving me complacent. I am excited about their commitment to reaching out and blessing the world in so many ways. It is a church where I have few objections. But the more time goes by, and the more I find myself wanting to seriously follow, serve, and draw closer to, Jesus Christ, the more those objections seem to be a big deal.
Most of my objections have to do with Evangelical Christianity in general as opposed to the church we attend in specific.
The first is a question of authority, or more properly, of authoritative-ness. I guess I believe that all authority is given to Jesus Christ, like it says in the gospels, and that this authority still resides in Jesus, as opposed to being found in a book or in a pedigree of clergy or priesthood. Since Jesus promised us that when we are gathered in his name, he is among us, we have access to his authority when we are acting in his name.
That’s fine and good, and it’s actually kind of a tangent, because it’s not really my problem. My problem is that in the church I attend, there’s a real sense of all being on the journey together, like we’re all trying to be disciples of Jesus Christ in the best way we can, and we’re helping each other do that. That sounds great, but it doesn’t do the trick for me.
While there may be Authority, the kind that actually only Jesus has from the Father, I don’t feel like this set-up is very authoritative. Trustworthy. Reliable. Solid. I don’t feel like this church as an institution has much of any weight behind it whatsoever. It doesn’t feel solid. I’m not saying I think it won’t last- the church has been around for 25 years after all. But what is 25 years in the nearly 2000-year history of Christianity? What institutional experience and wisdom can there even be in an organization that is so new, especially one that is both Evangelical and Emergent, both of which in the context of church history mean some measure of rejection of broad arrays of Christian tradition?
My point is that I don’t feel like Evangelical churches are authoritative. I don’t think the Bible alone makes them authoritative, either, and I also don’t even think belief in Jesus Christ makes them authoritative.
What I’m trying to say is this- I wouldn’t feel confident going to the pastor at Cedar Ridge for personal or spiritual guidance. I feel like he’s just a guy, same as me, trying to figure thigs out. That has a certain appeal, sure, especially from the pulpit (there isn’t technically a pulpit, but that’s beside the point), but at the same time it doesn’t make me feel like he’s a spiritual leader that I could turn to. As far as I know, he hasn’t been to a seminary or anything. It’s kind of a surprise that that matters to me, growing up Mormon with a lay clergy, but as it turns out I think it actually matters a lot.
So with Evangelical Christianity, I have problems with how authoritative I feel the institutions and clergy are. My second problem is more theological. In theory, I believe in Jesus Christ’s atoning sacrifice, once for all. I believe in salvation by grace through faith. I believe that the price for my sins has already been paid, that I am already forgiven before I even did anything wrong.
My problem is that that sounds great on paper and in conversation, but it seems too abstract in practice. Let’s say I do something wrong, and feel bad about it. What am I supposed to do to be right with God? My theology tells me that inasmuch as I have faith in Jesus Christ, I am already right with God. But that doesn’t seem very real. I feel like I’m left trying to convince myself that I’m already forgiven and that it’s already taken care of and I should just be thankful for what Jesus did for me. But I still feel really bad, and all I can do is try, in vain, to talk myself out of the guilt.
It’s all abstract: I just have to trust that my wrongs were already righted 2,000ish years ago so I have nothing to worry about. But I have a hard time convincing myself of it. Maybe it’s because I really don’t have faith. Maybe it’s because I’m still stuck in a Mormon mindset that demands I earn my salvation. I don’t know. But at the very least, I would like something concrete to do, at least an outward manifestation of reconciliation, so I can have some kind of closure on my sins. I’m not talking about earning forgiveness; I know I can’t do that. I just mean that I want to be able to somehow make concrete the abstract idea of my salvation by the grace of God. And Evangelical Christianity, in my opinion, doesn’t really offer that. It has no real sacraments, no clergy to confess to. It seems like the whole religion is just about deciding you believe, and then being glad about it.
I see it seem work for other people, and in theory I think it sounds great. But in practice it doesn’t seem to have any effect. I don’t feel transformed, healed, or even justified by just “realizing it’s all okay.”
Maybe I’ve missed the point- maybe Christianity is about realizing, for real, that it is okay, that Jesus made it so when you believe in him your sins are gone, and there’s nothing you have to do but acknowledge and accept it, for real. Maybe my insistence on some external performance is holding me back from real conversion, real faith, and the kind of transformational Christianity that I’m hungry for. I acknowledge the possibility. But it doesn’t change anything. And reassurances from other Christians that I’m on the right track are nice and supportive, but they’re not authoritative- they’re just more people like me, in the same boat as I am. What do they know? How are they more trustworthy than I am?
I imagine that the person that I really should trust is Jesus, that he has told me himself that he has atoned for my sins, and that anything else would just be noise. Maybe. But it doesn’t seem to be happening, to really be connecting. Again, I am left feeling like I’m just trying to talk myself out of feeling guilty.
I’ve talked about forgiveness for sins as probably the most important example, but the principles apply to the sum total of religious life. Evangelical Christianity has all of the action happen in the long ago and far away, and thus in the inaccessible abstract.
My third problem with Evangelical Christianity is the form of worship. For the most part, praise bands and Christian pop music do absolutely nothing for me. I want the deep spirituality of liturgy and hymns. I’m not trying to be a worship-consumer or anything, but modern, contemporary worship just doesn’t feel like it has any weight behind it. It is sincere but ephemeral, and seems to be primarily a matter of emotional appeal. Part of leaving Mormonism was the realization that emotions are not the same thing as the Holy Spirit. Emotions are the product of propaganda as often as they are the product of nearness to God.
Evangelical Christianity (particularly, for me at least, the emergent conversation) is firmly rooted in scripture, reason (within the context of faith), and mysticism (i.e. the Holy Spirit), but has abandoned tradition almost entirely. I know the emergent conversation has made overtures at recapturing some tradition, but in my opinion it’s been barely more than a token effort, and comes across as superficial to me.
In fact, sometimes Evangelical Christianity seems altogether tacky and plastic, not anything like an ancient Middle Eastern (or even European) faith tradition, and certainly not anything like the Kingdom of Heaven.
Finally, I have some issues with Community. I feel like Christian community is absolutely critical, as Jesus commanded his disciples to be one even as he is one with the Father. I realize that the emergent conversation has tried to emphasize this, but in practice it seems ot not be happening. How do you have authentic community in a megachurch?
Even at Cedar Ridge, which is certainly no megachurch, it seems to me like the congregation might be too big for authentic community, and although they try really hard (and admirably) to foster community, it seems artificial. It’s like they’re trying to make a plant by mixing the component parts all together in a bowl, instead of planting the seeds, setting up the right conditions, and cultivating it as it grows.
Anyway, I have a strange love-hate relationship with Evangelical Christianity, and I’m hesitant to embrace it more fully than I already have, while at the same time, it has things that I want and need that I don’t know if I really can find anywhere else. And I feel like I must face the real possibility that my hesitation is because of the lingering effects of my Mormon roots, or maybe because I simply haven’t fully been able to understand and appreciate what Jesus Christ is all about.
Sailing to Byzantium 
The way that I relate to your concerns about forgiveness is this: if I selfishly hurt my wife’s feelings, I can’t assuage my guilt simply by thinking about how Jesus died for me. Her feelings are still hurt, and Jesus’ sacrifice did nothing to prevent that or correct it (at least in the present). Christ’s sacrifice makes no practical difference here and now.
To overcome the effects of my sin, I still need to go to my wife and apologize, doing something to make up for my sin. I personally can’t see how Jesus’ death does much of anything to overcome the practical effects of sin.
You said, “Evangelical Christianity (particularly, for me at least, the emergent conversation) is firmly rooted in scripture, reason (within the context of faith), and mysticism (i.e. the Holy Spirit), but has abandoned tradition almost entirely. I know the emergent conversation has made overtures at recapturing some tradition, but in my opinion it’s been barely more than a token effort, and comes across as superficial to me.”
Based on that paragraph alone, for what it’s worth, it sounds to me as though your beliefs have a bit of a Weslyan flair already. (As… you pretty much are using the Weslyan Quadrilateral–Scripture, Reason, Experience, and Tradition) to see how things stack up. So… have you considered a Mainline Denomination (like Methodism which is around thanks to Mr. Wesley?). Many of the Mainline church structures have a hierarchy, which might settle some of your authority qualms… But confession isn’t involved in many of them (which is something that I think would be beneficial for so many reasons).
I don’t think all Evangelical Christians subscribe to the ‘mandatory praise band’ theory either, and I know Mainline churches often don’t (mine doesn’t). You may be able to find some churches with worship services that stylistically are a better fit. My husband and I are more liturgical than some. We like tradition. Our church right now is kind of ‘middle of the road’ in that way, and it works for us.
It also sounds to be as though you have a good grasp of grace and realize that we don’t need to DO anything to be made right with God because He’s already done that, but you also long for more of a response to that than, “Yay! Good for me!” I think that is reasonable. I think, too, that the nagging feeling that we have to earn our way to heaven is part of the human condition. Grace is just plain hard to wrap our minds around.
I’ll shut up now… I will. Because I am rambling and this is far from a cohesive helpful thought. You will find what a way to relate to God. I’m looking forward to what you will have to say regarding the other four potential paths.
Jonathan,
In the Jewish tradition, the Mishnah has a passage that covers exactly what you’re talking about – “For transgressions against God, the Day of Atonement atones; but for transgressions of one human being against another, the Day of Atonement does not atone until they have made peace with one another.”
Kullervo,
I can sympathize with your dilemma; I have to admit that sometimes I miss the comforting solidity of Tradition that I experienced at synagogue, and that I could theoretically have experienced in the Lutheran church of my childhood.
Kullervo,
I’d just like to comment on your community issues. First a sense of belonging, which is what I would define community to be, takes time to develop. I would even say years. In an earlier post you compared faith to marriage. As I’m sure you know, it takes more than a marriage certificate to turn two people into a couple. I would even say that some married people never achieve it. If it’s that hard for two people to form a community, it makes sense to me that it’s even harder for more than two. But, like a marriage, commitment has to come first. So, right now you’re in the dating stage, looking for that right church (or other religion, but it sounds like its probably going to be a church). When you find that right church, then you commit, and you stick with it when things get tough, and eventually you get to a sense of community. A community has to be knit together by shared experiences, both happy and painful, and that takes time.
Kullervo,
Thanks for sharing those insights and that perspective from somewhat of an outsider’s view. If anyone comes on here to tell you that you’ve got it all wrong about us, I’m standing in front of them saying “no, you fairly and accurately described your concerns and issues with Evangelicalism.” Good job getting so many thoughts into a clear and well thought post.
I am now back in a place where I can state without (much) reservation that I believe in Jesus and I want to follow him.
That’s all I care about. If you decide to worship Him with us, it’s just icing.
beingmade,
I plan on addressing Mainline Christianity at least in passing when I do my post on Anglicanism.
Dando,
You rule. If I thought you were representative of the whole of Christianity, it never would have entered my mind to doubt it.
One thought as well, on Kullervo’s topic:
As far as the forgiveness thing goes, here’s another marriage example that comes to mind. My wife really loves me. In my experience, I have never done anything that would make her stop loving me, or that she would not forgive me for. (This analogy has limitations, of course, that we will squint our eyes at for a moment) In fact, when I have done something I’m ashamed of, I can practically assume that I will come to her, sad and humble, and she will have practically “already forgiven me” as a matter of course. Here are my questions:
1) I wonder if that would still be the case if I stopped apologizing? The apology, of course, is only token; her forgiveness is entirely hers to give or withhold. But what if I stopped even giving lip-service to that right and simply assumed it was “all cool” all the time?
2) Let’s assume that the forgiveness was independent of my apology, that she would give it anyway. What kind of relationship could I be said to be cultivating with her if I did not ever ask for her forgiveness? This is not a question of whether I am forgiven or not, but what kind of relationship I am allowing us to have. Is in one where we interact, confess (to each other) our faults, and assure each other that we still love each other? Or do we just assume that our promises on day 1 are still good an never talk? What would be the ramifications of the latter situation?
It may be that if you want to be forgiven, there’s nothing you have to do; but if you want to be consoled, in effect to be told you’re forgiven, you have to apologize and do something about it. And if you perpetually choose the former over the latter, I can see how over time it would degrade, not reinforce, the living relationship with the person in question.
You’ve posed some wonderfully insightful questions. I know that as a “regular” evangelical “guy” you’re not interested in my answers, but I will say this: If you ever find yourself asking a church leader about what is authoritative and rather than point you to an eternal, reliable, transcendent source of authority, he points to himself, or his church, or his clergy, or his traditions, RUN!
I’m definitely interested in input and commentary.
But, basically I assume you’re giving me the standard evangelical/fundamentalist answer that the only source for authority is the Bible, which is fine and good, although I do not necessarily agree with it.
Or rather, I do most certainly think that the Bible is authoritative, but just because a church is “based on the Bible” doesn’t mean the church isn’t full of crap.
Marian–I think you’re spot on with the idea of community. I know that Kullervo and I struggled in one of our Mormon wards because we wanted ‘community’ to happen to us. It did wind up happening, but it took a couple of years for the people to stop being ‘those weirdos’, and start being ‘those lovable folks’. When we moved to our next ward, we threw ourselves into the thick of things (of course, it was Harlem, so it was easy, because BEST WARD EVER), which was aided by getting some major callings immediately. In any case, we felt that sense of community incredibly fast because we did it and did it without reservation.
But I do think community is like family. I am not like my siblings at all, and I don’t know that I’d be friends with any of them were we not related. However, we grew up together, and weathered the good, the bad, the zits, the everything together, so we have a bond that we don’t have with anyone else.
Dando, I’ll agree with Racticas–you do rule. 🙂
And Kullervo, I share some of your concerns about Evangelical Christianity. I don’t know that I’d be comfortable identifying myself as an evangelical. Christian? Count me in. Evangelical? I don’t know that I want to be a part of the baggage that comes with it. I understand your desire for authority, and see no easy resolution for that within the confines of evangelicalism.
Racticas–I think your analogy about forgiveness was perfect and beautiful. If Kullervo stopped apologizing… would I keep forgiving? I’d like to think I would… but being an imperfect human and all… I think that asking forgiveness, though, goes beyond just whether or not the other person accepts it–it’s a matter of humbling ourselves and recognizing our need for a Savior and for forgiveness. If we stopped realizing that we do need forgiveness… what then?
Ahh, brain food. The best kind–doesn’t leave me nauseated. 🙂
Absolutely, a church can say they are “based on the Bible” and be full of crap, but would you agree that the crap would be readily apparent to someone who actually knows what the Bible says?
Not necessarily, I think. But anyway, this is kind of a tangent.
The discussion of the Bible as a specific authority is a tangent, but it is one that you introduced. Note that I specifically avoided mentioning the Bible. I hope you’ll agree that “an eternal, reliable, transcendent source of authority” is what you are looking for, assuming that it is accessible to the honest, diligent seeker.
Anyway, this whole line of discussion is actually not at all what I was talking about in this post. Thanks for your input, though.
“My third problem with Evangelical Christianity is the form of worship. For the most part, praise bands and Christian pop music do absolutely nothing for me. I want the deep spirituality of liturgy and hymns.”
I’m really enjoying reading this. I find it very fascinating how much thought has been put into your search. Anywho…you said the above. I have to agree. At our church I feel like it is a show. Just a way to attract people to come to church. Maybe it is. Maybe it isn’t. I don’t really know. I find myself avoiding the sermons and just attending the bible studies where I can actually learn for myself.
I apologize, Kullervo. I didn’t mean to derail your train of thought. I thought you were troubled by the lack of authoritative clergy/leaders in evangelical churches.
Jim,
I think that Kullervo is troubled by the lack of authoritative clergy/leaders in evangelical churches… and nothing you said responded to that.
What’s wrong with utilizing tradition in church? What’s wrong with having clergymen/women who claims some authority? Unless they’re claiming to be God, or directing you away from Jesus Christ, I don’t see why that would be a bad thing?
An example, outside of religious contexts. We can’t deal with a corporation itself. While corporations exist and even have the legal status of an artificial person, the dealings of a corporation are all handled by its agents. These agents are delegated the authority to act in the name of the corporation. They can bind the corporation into contracts.
Now, I’m NOT saying that the kingdom of God is like a corporation, by any stretch. But, that aside, what is wrong with having an agent who can speak authoritatively on your behalf? Why can’t the kingdom of God have clergymen/women who are well learned and can help direct you towards Jesus Christ and a path of forgiveness or answers, or whatever?
I’ve been thinking about the authority issue for a couple of days. As it’s been mentioned above, we EVs place and find our authority in the Bible.
As a result of that placement we place some degree of authority on those with a greater education and understanding of the Bible. We understand that the Bible is not written from our own context so we rely on those who have studied the Bible at a higher level to explain it to us. This is why I think it’s important that our teaching pastors attend Seminary.
On a local level I think we also place authority in the hands of our church elders (if our church is set up like that). I trust them to budget the church’s money apporpriately and I submit to the general direction they set for the church. I also would submit myself to their discipline and reconciliation to the body if the occasion called for it.
There are as many forms of church government as there are Protestant denominations, so results may vary. But every Protestant church has “some” form of organizational structure, doctrinal accountability and expectation of acceptable behavior of its members. But because we don’t believe in ONE true church people are easily able to break fellowship whenever they personally disagree with the church authority above them and shop for a new church. The sin of consumerism is rampant in Evangelical churches and it’s something we need to address.
But again, let’s not confuse the issue, Dando. I’m not actually talking about authority, but a sense of being authoritative.
As far as authority goes, I’ve already said that I think that the authority is held by Jesus Christ, not the Bible. Some people might see that as a semantic difference, and it’s also not really what this post is about anyway.
Some people, and I imagine evangelicals fit in this camp, would say that the only criteria for how authoritative a church and/or clergy is is whether that church or clergy bases everything on the Bible. But that doesn’t do the trick for me.
disclaimer: Katy, I have tremendous respect for you and Kullervo and I would almost rather be silent than to say anything on Kullervo’s blog that could be interpreted as disrespecting his wife, but hopefully I can respond respectfully and with humility in a way that honors you.
“What’s wrong with utilizing tradition in church? What’s wrong with having clergymen/women who claims some authority?”
There’s nothing wrong with claiming some authority in the church hierarchy as long as that authority is ultimately in submission to something “eternal, reliable, and transcendent”.
“Kullervo is troubled by the lack of authoritative clergy/leaders in evangelical churches… and nothing you said responded to that.”
I advised that if he ever again encounters someone who is claiming that they are authoritative in the sense that I think he means it, in other words, a person who wants to relieve his concern by pointing to themselves as being perfectly reliable and transcendent, he should run. How was that not a response? Maybe I am missing some nuance of the word authoritative. If Kullervo does not mean “infallibly speaks for Jesus” and he does not mean “having authority” as Dando described, then I’m not sure what we are saying about this “agent who can speak authoritatively on [God’s] behalf”. How does the agent know authoritatively what God would have him or her say?
I definitely don’t mean “infallibly speaks for Jesus.”
Ok, so it sounds like we are more or less in violent agreement with respect to human authorities, but I would ask: if our authoritative source of truth is not infallible, what good is it?
You might ask that, but since it isn’t really the subject at hand, you might not get an answer. You certainly won’t get one from me.
https://byzantium.wordpress.com/2007/07/12/the-old-limbo-crossoads/
Go back and read that introductory post, and then please graciously leave this line of conversation alone. Or at least save it for another time.
Kullervo,
What great news and a great pronoucement of faith. Although I’ve only been reading your blog for the last several months, it has been great to see your journey to faith in Jesus. Your honesty and approach is refreshing. I’m really, honestly excited for you!
I think you’ve hit on some of the key issues in Evangelicalism. These bother me too as an Evangelical. I share a couple of your concerns so let me also share what helps me in these.
On authoriativeness it helps me to take the long view. Christians traditions are all linked. We can study Augustine, Bonhoeffer, Clement, Luther, etc, and learn from them. They are our brothers in Christ. There is a long standing work of writing from Christian leaders that stretches right back into the first century. I’m not sure how you view that with your Mormon background, but it is helpful to me. As I’ve studied some of these what I’ve discovered is that the essense of the faith hasn’t changed much over time, though the application to our context does. These works aren’t infallible which is why EVs take it back to the Bible, but they do serve as good roadmaps. But you are right on, EVs are decentralized to the extreme, and the lack of authoritativeness is one way that plays out.
On worship, I agree. I miss tremendously the ritual traditions of higher churches. I studied in England for six months and had a chance to experience some of these in worship at Anglican churches. Rather than being the witch doctor stuff I was expecting, I found them helpful in guiding me in my worship and experiencing God more holistically. It also made me appreciate to a greater degree some of the rituals in protestant faiths like the Presbyterian church. I really miss this in my community of faith, and it is one of the things that has made me consider other churches at times.
I’m looking forward to reading more about your crossroads and the path you take.