Captain Thin

CNN has a good article on Kenda Creasy Dean’s new book Almost Christian where she argues that many religious teens are Christian in name only.  “Dean says more American teenagers are embracing what she calls “moralistic therapeutic deism.” Translation: It’s a watered-down faith that portrays God as a “divine therapist” whose chief goal is to boost people’s self-esteem.”

Once again, however, we read that the Christians doing the best job of passing on real faith are evangelicals (Lutherans are generally considered members of “mainline denominations” rather than evangelical). There’s a lot of talk out there among Lutherans about how shallow a lot of evangelical youth ministry is (see, for example, Gene Veith’s blog post “Youth group madness” from a couple of days ago). To some extent, some of that talk is justified. But when it comes down to brass tacks, evangelicals are succeeding in passing on the faith where the vast majority of Lutherans are not. They’re doing something right, and it’s clearly a something that most Lutherans just don’t seem to get.

We discussed elements of this topic on my site back in 2009 in an entry entitled “Stemming the Tide of Church Youth Dropouts”. I’m curious to hear what new ideas people have on what we Lutherans can do to more seriously engage young people in their faith. Brainstorm people.

In Canada we haven’t had much (if any) media coverage of the crisis occuring in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America since its August 2009 vote to approve homosexual relationships and open the clergy to non-celibate homosexuals. But an article of mine published today on the National Post’s religion blog “Holy Post” is intended to fill that gap a bit. It’s admittedly a cursory glance at a very complex issue, but I think I do a fair job of explaining the situation. So go ahead and check out my article (which the Post named and not I) “Lutherans follow Anglicans down rocky road of dissent”. For a reminder just how widespread the fallout over the 2009 vote is, visit my frequently updated (but by no means exhaustive) chronicle of congregational action in the ELCA.

Update – August 30, 2010

Another article of mine, this time a much shorter one on the birth of the North American Lutheran Church, has now been published in LCC InfoDigest (forthcoming also in The Canadian Lutheran): “New Lutheran church body established.” This one focuses a bit more on the Canadian connection.

There’s a perception still common in Western Society that Christianity is a “white religion.” It’s old. It’s patriarchal. And it’s imperialistic. Case settled, right? Well, it might be except for the awkward fact that the the average Christian these days is unlikely to be any of those things. North American and European Christians today account for only 38% of the global population of Christians. As noted in Philip Jenkins’ 2002 (revised 2007) book The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity, the “average Christian” is a citizen of the Global South – Latin America, Africa, and Asia. Christianity is not only alive and well in these areas; it’s growing at a phenomenal rate.

Images from The Thinking Christian, based on Jenkins’ numbers.

I was reminded of this fact while listening to a White Horse Inn podcast of the recent “Conversation on Global Evangelism” held at Saddleback Church (sponsored by the Lausanne Movement for World Evangelism, and featuring such thinkers as Skye Jethani, Michael Horton, Jim Belcher, Kay Warren, Jena Lee Nardella, Miles McPherson and Soong Chan Rah). One of the thing these western theological leaders comment at length on is just that – the disproportionate number of western theological leaders in the world.

As time goes on, the centre of Christian thought will eventually shift to reflect the new reality. And personally, I think that’s just fine. Christians in the Global South, living as they do with affliction in the forms of poverty, AIDS, famine, civil unrest, religious persecution, and so much more, have a vibrancy in their faith lacking in much of the West. In the midst of actual suffering, these Christians’ adherence to Scripture is something we in the West must admire.

Already we’re seeing elements of the leadership-shift as African bishops in Anglicanism and Lutheranism call on increasingly liberal counterparts in North America and Europe to return to historical orthodoxy. Think back to GAFCON (Global Anglican Future Conference) held in Jerusalem 2008. Anglican leaders, primarily from the Global South but also including conservative leaders from the West, gathered to chart an orthodox course for world Anglicanism in opposition to the liberal agenda of the North American and European churches. Many of the same bishops in attendance would refuse to attend the Lambeth Conference (the traditional world conference of the Anglican Communion) a month later – a visible sign of the theological tensions between West and the Rest.

Likewise, leading up to the Lutheran World Federation Assembly in Stuttgart this year, African leaders representing 18.5 million Lutherans displayed their anger over the West’s recent moves to affirm alternate sexualities in a tersely worded statement. “The majority of African member churches say ‘NO’ to homosexual acts and regard it to be sinful.” The message was clear: Western churches were not going to be allowed to hijack the Assembly’s agenda to push ideas which the African church had already determined were unbiblical.

Christians in the Global South are beginning to make their voices heard. Let us pray that the West will sit up and listen.

———-

If you’d like to read a bit more about the shift underway in World Christianity, check out Philip Jenkins’ article “Liberating Word: The Power of the Bible in the Global South”.

It would be a very lucky North American Christian who has never run into the Jesus Junk phenomena. You know what I mean: that cheap garbage which populates the shelves of your local Christian bookstore, stuff traditionally used as “prizes” in Sunday School and Vacation Bible School programs. Pencils, erasers, yo-yos, frisby-type toys, etc. Today, this nonsense extends to t-shirts, coffee-cups, and so much more (If you need a refresher, you can see some examples of Jesus Junk here).

Now, it seems to me that much (if not all) of this material is obviously empty of real spiritual value. Jeff Dunn has an excellent article on the subject over at the Internet Monk website. In addition to talking about Jesus kitsch, he discusses how many of the books (even Bibles) in Christian stores are similarly being emptied of their spiritual significance. You should go read his article. Now.

A friend of mine, who used to run the brilliant blogsite Credo Ut Intellegam (and who – just in case he’s reading this – should hurry up and resurrect it), once suggested that he and I should start a company to sell “Tetzel’s Pretzals” with catch-lines like “Salted with the Fires of Hell” and “Indulge Yourself.” Of course he was parodying the Jesus Junk phenomena. But the joke draws an important parallel – the sale of indulgences was a waste of money providing no real spiritual benefit. Too much of what is being sold in Christian stores today is similarly low on spiritual content. Put bluntly, it’s junk food. And a steady diet of Christian junk food will lead inevitably to spiritual malnourishment in churches across North America.

[A quick Google search reveals my friend and I, alas, weren’t the first to develop the idea of “Tetzel’s Pretzels.” On the plus side, that means you get to look at the nice shiny picture below. See the creator’s original post on Tetzel’s Pretzels here.]

A few days ago, First Things released an interesting article by Robert Benne entitled “Lutherans in Search of a Church.” Benne does a good job of discussing the crisis which August’s Chuch-Wide Assembly vote in the ELCA has caused the denomination. And he gives a very informative look at LCMC (Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ) and the forthcoming NALC (North American Lutheran Church).

The article has some problems – perhaps most significantly its last paragraph:

Whatever comes of these ventures remains to be seen. If the Holy Spirit blesses them they will flourish and provide new beginnings for Lutheranism in America. For many they are the last, great efforts to live out the promise of Lutheranism as a church on this continent. If they fail, the only remaining option may be a bracing swim across the Tiber.

Now, I can understand that these new denominations could well be “new beginnings for Lutheranism in America.” But to suggest that they are the only options for orthodox Lutherans and that, if they fail, the “only remaining option” for orthodox Lutherans might be that of joining the Roman Catholic Church is a little much. Surely Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod, Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, the Association of Free Lutheran Congregations, or any of the other dozens of Lutheran denominations operating in the United States would be options for Lutherans wishing to remain Lutheran? Rome is hardly the only option (or, for that matter, an option at all) for orthodox Lutherans.

On November 25, Justice Stephen Kelleher of the B.C. Supreme Court ruled in favour of the Diocese of New Westminster against four congregations who left the Anglican Church of Canada (ACoc) in 2008 to join the Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC), which was one of the founding members of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). The congregations in question are St Matthew’s (Abbotsford), St Matthias & St Luke’s (Vancouver), St John’s Shaughnessy (Vancouver), and Church of the Good Shepherd (Vancouver).

While such acts have become commonplace in the United States, there was hope that the differences between the Canadian and American legal systems would allow orthodox Anglicans the ability to retain their church properties as they leave the increasingly liberal Anglican Church of Canada. That hope has not been realized. The  decision prompted Anglican Network in Canada responded with a news release where they lamented the following:

Mr Justice Kelleher preferred to follow American legal principles rather than apply British and Canadian cases which have held that “As a rule, where a church organization is formed for the purpose of promoting certain defined doctrines of religion, the church property which it acquires is impressed with a trust to carry out that purpose, and a majority cannot divert the property to inconsistent uses against the protest of a minority however small.” (See Anderson v. Gislason 1920 Man. CA) He also chose not to apply established British and Canadian “cy pres” trust principles in dealing with the church properties.

There was, however, some small good news in the midst of the bad. Justice Kelleher ruled that $2.2 million that had been given in trust to the Good Shepherd congregation should remain in the hands of the ANiC congregation and not the diocese.

This news story, while bitter-sweet, hits home particularly hard for me as I have friends in the St. John’s Shaughnessy congregation. Keep orthodox Anglicans and Episcopaleans in your prayers as they struggle against the oppression of their national church bodies.

What exactly is it that gets political officials so riled up when their churches take them to task over the disconnect between what they claim to profess and what they publicly practice? Recently down in the United States, Congressman Patrick Kennedy has been denied the privilege of taking Holy Communion in Roman Catholic churches over his stance on abortion. The issue is simple logic:

1. Roman Catholics only allow practising Roman Catholics in good standing to take communion.
2. To be a practising Roman Catholic in good standing, one must follow all the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.
3. Congressman Patrick Kennedy refuses to follow all the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.
4. Therefore Congressman Kennedy cannot be a practising Roman Catholic in good standing.
5. Therefore the Roman Catholic Church cannot commune him.

The Congressman is certainly entitled to his own beliefs. But he is not entitled to force those beliefs upon a church body that does not agree. Nor can he force the church to change its official practice (regarding who should be communed) to accommodate his own heterodox beliefs.

This is certainly not the first time we’ve seen public leaders refused communion or threatened with excommunication for claiming allegiance to a church while acting in direct opposition to that church’s teachings. Here’s a mere glimpse at some of the actions taken by the Roman Catholic Church in recent history:

• June 2004 – Bishop Frederick Henry of Calgary (Canada) publishes a pastoral letter decrying the “moral incoherence” of Prime Minister Paul Martin on such issues as homosexual marriage and abortion. The Bishop had previously called to task then Prime Minister Jean Chretien and then Conservative Party leader Joe Clark, and announced he would not serve them communion. He had even suggested that he himself would not preside at Clark’s funeral if the latter preceded him.
• March 2007 – Bishop Marcelino Hernandez announces that any Mexican politicians who vote in favour of a bill to legalize abortion will be excommunicated.
• May 2007 – Pope Benedict XVI issues a warning to Catholic politicians worldwide who deliberately flout the church’s position on abortion.
• March 2008 – Archbishop Terrance Prendergast, Archbishop of Canada’s capital city Ottawa, says he would “refuse communion to any politician who “obstinately” supports access to abortion, but only if he or she cannot be persuaded to stand down.”
• September 2009 – Polish bishops issue a warning to politicians that if they support abortion, they face excommunication.
• November 2009 – Bishop Juan Antonio Martinez Camino, spokesman for Spain’s Bishops’ Conference, announces that any politicians who vote in favour of a bill to liberalize of abortion laws in the country will be automatically excommunicated and refused communion.