Check out Church Marketing Sucks’ review of The Fine Line. Sounds like a must-read that addresses the age old tension for Christians – in / of the world. I started to comment out there, but as often happens the comment turned into a full post:

Wow, what a can of worms. It is precisely this tension that makes me interested in sites like Church Marketing Sucks and Beyond Relevance.

I especially liked the emphasis on Lincoln’s three questions and the author’s added fourth question. I believe that before addressing specific tasks such as loving others is premature in the discussion as the mere suggestion that our faith is life-changing is revolutionary in this day and age.

As I see it, being OF the world is the bigger problem and the church falls into it unintentionally. Today’s church-goer doesn’t immerse their self in the world as an act of defiance. They’ve simply never been shown / taught a relationship with Christ that makes any kind of a practical difference.

And that’s where I become interested and suspicious when it comes to marketing. It seems many churches feel that proclaiming a life-changing gospel will make people uncomfortable thus driving away members and warding off prospects. When a church turns to trendy marketing to drive up numbers I begin to wonder if their focus is in the right place. Is a church that is willing to soft-peddle the gospel to attract a crowd really helping the cause?

I know that some say, “Well, at least those people are going to some kind of church, somewhere.” I’m not so sure that’s good enough anymore.

I’ve long felt that the church will soon be sifted, and reduced to only the strong. Those who have been scratching their itch with a watered-down, non-intrusive version of the gospel will be quickly swept away. I had kind of lost track of this vision for a while, and am thankful for a recent sermon that has rekindled that sense of urgency.

Wow. This is so where I’m at right now.

My favorite line: “I’m going to send out a direct mailer and I’m sure our attendance is going to more than double and it’s going to change everything.” Now they just need to make one about all the crap that goes on behind the scenes.

So, I didn’t quite know what to make of the guy’s blog: Beyond Relevance: an Innovative Blog for a culturally strategic church …

The basic premise here is nothing new.  “The fads and gimmicks that have been tried before fall flat because they are insufficient – here’s the right way to do it.”  And that is a good premise up to a point because gimmicks generally don’t work and the real problem is that everyone is looking for the right trick, the righ “hook” thinking that when they stumble upon it they are just going to explode and become their area’s next mega-church. So, he’s on the right track, but is he just the next gimmick in line?

“Culturally strategic” threw me because again, one of the common gimmicks is the lame, entirely out of place church guy showing up somewhere to rub elbows with the “real people” so he can invite them to church. People can smell an ulterior motive a mile away, and it’s just about as attractive as viewing someone you want to minister to as a curious spectacle, a “real live sinner” rather than just another person who needs Christ just as much as you.

On the other hand, without a strategy, do we even get out of bed in the morning?

Anyway, this guy does seem to be on to something deeper. From his “about this blog” page:

I have witnessed countless churches pursue relevance as an end all, only to find themselves “cool” but confounded in reaching people.

The truth is, there are many deeper issues behind church growth and the way we do things that factor into the church’s success in reaching people. To be effective, a church has to be so much more than just relevant.

Before reading his stuff I would have said that, by definition, yes relevance is important. I think that is just a matter of me taking the word literally while he is attacking it as a concept and a current church fad. Regardless, he’s got my interest.

Man, this is good: Public Servants and Moral Reasoning: A notice to the Catholic community in northern Colorado. Hear me out – this is not about partisan politics.

The letter is the Archbishop of Denver’s response to Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden, both Catholic, rationalizing views on abortion that are contrary to their church’s teachings during visits to NBC’s Meet the Press recently.

Here’s the thing. It is a no nonsense slap at a couple of liberal Democrats, and vigorous defense of the Catholic Church’s pro life doctrine. And of course I’m all for that any day of the week. But this is much more than a “hoot and holler, let’s get ‘em!” matter.

The same tone and much the same language could, and should, be directed to anyone, of any faith who makes a habit of equivocating on foundational issues for the sake of expediency.

After the votes are counted and the victors sworn in, we are still Christians. As exciting and interesting as this political season may seem, God help us if we don’t have an unchanging foundation that transcends it all.

Well, no sooner did I identify Meat Loaf as the biggest sell-out than Rabe one-upped me with this story on Pat Robertson.  Honestly, “Pat Robertson, Al Sharpton and Al Gore go to a beach …” should be the start of a really saucy joke.  Unfortunately it’s all too real.  The line that really spun me up:

On Monday’s broadcast of “The 700 Club,” Robertson said that when the filming was done, the three of them prayed together at Gore’s urging.  (from the original AP story via Rabe’s post)

Sorry, I just can’t even make that scenario play out in my head.  The day Al Gore takes the lead on prayer … lock me in a church somewhere with a real Reverend.

A longer, more even-handed treatment of last week’s press attack on Sunrise can be found here.

Once again we are seeing what happens when “faith” is used as a tool in the political campaign process.  It’s a tool with which those who try to wield it are laughably clumsy.

We who attend church regularly and are actually pursuing a faith that is real and personal recognize the cluelessness, but we can only watch helplessly as we are locked outside of a vicious circle.

The candidates are pretending and everyone knows it.  Reporters don’t have a clue so they are unable to ask the right questions.  And commentators don’t have a clue so their analysis is usually off base.  And finally true cornerstones of faith such as knowledge of the bible and a vital prayer life are on the decline among Christians (more…)

Over a few days leading up to this past Tuesday’s primaries, Karl Rove opined that McCain clinching his party’s nomination and the Democrats fighting on may not be a good thing.  It would keep the Dems on the front page and squeeze McCain out of the public consciousness.

I might agree with that were Obama and Hillary poised to wage an honorable battle of competing big ideas, advance their liberal causes, and energize the left of the electorate.  But these two will be beating each other’s brains in with pettiness for the next seven weeks.  What have we had over the last two days?  Health Care?  Defense?  The Economy?  No.  It has been all about name-calling, tax returns and the trial of a corrupt Chicago businessman.

McCain will do just fine to play grandpa, remaining above the fray, occasionally chuckling at how those kids bicker.  If the Dems ever do accidentally stray into matters that matter and come up with something earth-shaking, McCain will be able to put his two cents in.

– B –

A continually updating collection of all things Rezko here.  I just wish they’d put up an RSS feed.

– B –

And while we are distracted with the pettiness, one of the more troubling developments in recent days:  California court rules that parents do not have a Constitutional right to home school.  And it’s not just about the home schooling or the conservative values that home schooling families tend to have.  It’s about judges once again trying to establish that the government, despite ABUNDANT evidence to the contrary, knows better than a family what is best for said family.

Closer to home, the faith-based organization that I work for incurred a smear job from the local newspaper this week.  Obviously I can’t go into any detail at all, but the the journalism boasted the same style of loose research and unsupported innuendo that the NY Times recently featured in their piece on John McCain.  Also I will point out that we indeed are a faith-based organization and have the right to have and act on our values.

The point is, there is a full-scale war on.  Where there are standards, they are attacked.  Where there are values they are attacked.  Where there is faith it is attacked.  And make not mistake, once the Democrats finally settle their differences, it will be open season on all of these and the things we hold dear will become fuel for evening news punch lines delivered by leftist candidates, and their surrogates in Hollywood and the news media and … naive so-called conservatives who don’t take this seriously.

My inner turmoil continues.  Not a good showing for Mitt at all last night.  For me the biggest disappointment was California.  I was hoping that even if he didn’t score an outright win, Romney would manage something resembling a split of the delegate count.  Actually it turned out just the opposite.  His share of the popular vote was respectable, but broken down into districts he wound up with just the crumbs.

And I’m not even going to visit the “Huckabee is taking votes from Romney” idea.  If Romney were doing well enough to establish himself as the clear #2 and Huckabee as a distant #3, maybe.  But right now you could just as easily say that Romney is taking votes from Huckabee.  Granted, across all 50 states Romney has broader appeal while Huckabee’s strength is confined to a narrow segment of states.  Unfortunately for Romney, the primary schedule is front-loaded with Huckabee-friendly states. (more…)

First a disclaimer:  Outside of myself and a small number of people that I am close to, I don’t know for sure who is or isn’t truly a Christian.  And, I recognize that it is not my place to make definitive pronouncements on who is or isn’t saved.  I would counter that by reminding everyone that you can not divorce faith and action – there may be brief anomalies, but in general works should spring from true faith.  So I have strong inklings about a lot of people.

So, I almost fell out of my chair when I browsed FoxNews’ report on Beliefnet’s 12 Most Powerful Christians in Hollywood.  There are 12 of them out there!?  And actually beliefnet claims that they had a large group from which to choose.

More about beliefnet in a moment.  First I must confess that the piece wasn’t as lost as I expected.  For most of the 12 there were quotes and anecdotes that did suggest somewhat more than “this person gives money to their local unitarian church, and protests the war out of deep religious conviction.”

Actually, one of the 2 or 3 that I struggle most with was Mel Gibson coming in at #1.  And I’m not questioning just because of the drunken, anti-semitic rant, any more than I’ll assume the best just because he made “Passion of the Christ.”  During the lengthy promo season for that movie we got to hear a lot from Gibson, and while he professes to be following his Catholic faith, it seems to be in a selective or random way.

I also dispute that Gibson changed Hollywood, as beliefnet proclaimed citing “Chronicles of Narnia” as an example.  Ummm, Narnia is one of those flicks that would have been a hit with the “Harry Potter” crowd with or without “Passion” laying the groundwork.  It is beloved to Christians but has tremendous crossover appeal.  Gibson showed Hollywood that there is money in faith-oriented films.  He may have changed their business plan, but that doesn’t mean he changed their hearts.

Specifics aside, pieces like this, and resources like beliefnet scare me.

As I read the Bible it seems to me that come the end times, the number of Christians, true members of the Body of Christ on earth, will be relatively small. (more…)

Advance Apology:  This may turn into rambling as it is something that I’m still wrestling with.  But I ran across this, at It Takes a Church, which comments on this post, which had to be difficult for its writer.

Broad summary:  Sally Morgenthaler wrote the book Worship Evangelism, and became a champion of the concept.  Recently however, she had a painful epiphany.  Ms. Morgenthaler finally came to realize that though Worship as Evangelism appeared to be a success, it was not accomplishing the purpose of either worship or evangelism, much less both.  As you read her words you can feel the pain at having to scrap what had become her life’s work and go back to the drawing board.

Some preliminary comments:  I’m one of those people who has been in church in a variety of capacities for my entire life.  After some personal struggles and then reading Ms. Morganthaler’s comments it seems that a majority of churches have never really completely figured out worship, and / or evangelism, whether or not they’ve been trying to combine them. (more…)