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.
Statistics like these have created something of a mania in recent years, as baby-boomer evangelical leaders frantically assess what they have done wrong (why didn’t megachurches work to attract youth in the long term?) and scramble to figure out a plan to keep young members engaged in the life of the church.
Increasingly, the “plan” has taken the form of a total image overhaul, where efforts are made to rebrand Christianity as hip, countercultural, relevant. As a result, in the early 2000s, we got something called “the emerging church”””a sort of postmodern stab at an evangelical reform movement. Perhaps because it was too “let’s rethink everything” radical, it fizzled quickly. But the impulse behind it””to rehabilitate Christianity’s image and make it “cool”””remains.
We have some people in our parish who, at the conclusion of our Saturday night service, feel compelled to call out “Yea God” rather than “Hallelujah, Hallelujah, Hallelujah.”
I have never heard of this being done in done and the difference between “Yea God” and “Hallelujah” seems to be the difference between a rallying ‘cheer’ given to a sports team/figure and the reverent and deeply repectful praise given to The Creator.
One problem with trying to “be hip” is that there is no way to “stay hip” as technology changes, musical tastes change, things that appeal to young people constantly change, and people age. The church that tries to be hip always winds up looking like a bunch of old hipsters putting on a phoney show.
Make sure you are offering them the things that last.
#2, Amen. My 19-year-old and 22-year-old loath attempts at trendiness in church. They love reverent, dignified, moderately high church formality. They want church to look, feel, sound and smell like church. they find attempts at being hip embarrassing.
#’s 2 and 3: Very true. I wholeheartedly agree, and so what I’m about to say is meant to take issue with the article, not the fact that we shouldn’t put our methods above the message when it comes to trying to reach people for the sake of Jesus.
My first objection:
The warning against being relevant over being faithful needs to be continually preached to the Church in our culture. I know I’ve been guilty of that sin on more than one occasion as a pastor. However, McCracken (the author of the article) sets up a straw man and blows him down. For instance, I don’t think that Mark Driscoll is guilty of [i]only[/i] trying to be shocking and hip when he preaches on sex (especially in his last few, toned-down years). In fact, Driscoll has given an explanation of what is permissible to reach people with the Gospel: we hold tightly in one hand correct doctrine and theology, and we hold loosely in the other methods (so long as they do not go against Scripture). And since when is writing a book on sex automatically a ploy to get people to like Jesus and church? Shouldn’t we think theologically about sex? McCracken may not connect with preachers like Driscoll because of their style (and we do need to listen to that objection), but Driscoll and others mentioned faithfully connect with people in their culture by contextualizing (in the good, biblical sense) the message of Jesus and showing how what the Bible says really is relevant to their lives.
Snarky objection:
[blockquote]If the evangelical Christian leadership thinks that “cool Christianity” is a sustainable path forward, they are severely mistaken. 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.[/blockquote]
Really? Bummer. I guess our secret evangelical Christian leadership meeting at an undisclosed location last month was all for naught. At the end of the meeting, the vote came down to preaching Jesus and being hip, and being hip won out by three votes. I’ve even already had my $300 metrosexual makeover done.
The bottom line: we need to take people like McCracken seriously–even when they write bad articles–when they say something turns them off from church. In our community, we fully recognize that our church culture and style of worship and preaching will not click with some not-yet-believers. That’s why we are thankful for and partner with other churches who also have a heart for telling people about the Jesus of the Bible. But no matter which direction we choose, it always needs to be consistent with what the Bible commands, and a large part of that is putting the message of Jesus first above all else.
For anyone who hasn’t already read it, here is the link to [url=http://stuffchristianslike.net/2008/06/269-understanding-how-metrosexual-your-worship-leader-is-a-handy-guide/]Understanding How Metrosexual Your Worship Leader Is.[/url] Quite humorous because of how realistic it is.
#3 Evan, I absolutely agree. Many young people over the years have told me the same thing.
I think that addressing the issues of a group in flux by trying to tailor a message and image to them is foolish and unauthentic. They see right through it and, for the more intelligent young people, it can cause more harm, I think. They live in a world heavily influenced by marketing and repackaging — so, what happens when you take something they actually believe (whether they admit it or not) to be solid and timeless and make it gimmicky? It casts suspicion on the authenticity of the message and the timelessness.
My son is in this age group and, yes, he has fallen away from regular church attendance. At first, I was dismayed and reminded him frequently to attend church. I even emailed the priest who ran the Canterbury group. But I’ve learned that the best thing I can do right now is to let him be. In our many conversations about the world and the state of society, I can hear and address his questions and tensions. I also hear the beliefs and values with which he was raised. It’s not all lost — it’s simmering. And I gently remind him from time to time that the Church remains there for him, too.
This is a time for wondering and testing and thinking. I think I’d worry more if he didn’t wonder and test and think. Faith that emerges from this stage of a young person’s life can be more sure and enduring than that of a young person who doesn’t put in the work and merely continues out of habit or fears of hell. Whatever does emerge will be his and he will have to own it. I know that I did — and continue to do — my part and fulfilled the promises I made at his baptism. I know it sounds trite but letting go and letting God seems to me to be the best thing. Remaking the brand in a patronizing attempt to attract young people isn’t.
Beautifully said, Teatime. Much the same for my 22-year-old. He graduated from college in May and last week, enlisted in the USAF. Wants to be a pararescue jumper (PJ). I know from my own experience that he will probably fall away from church attendance when he’s in the military and single, but he has been more intentional in his faith as a young man than I was, so I hope he’ll come back even stronger than I did. Hopefully there’ll be a recognizably Anglican church for him when does.
I recently attended a church that (to my mind) exemplified the “hipness” that was talked about here. I was bombarded by noise from the moment I walked into the auditorium, was distracted by the young girl in front of me wearing way too short shorts, and had to worry about spilling the coffee that the person next to me put on the floor while she was clapping her hands.
There were some good things though. We actually prayed the collect without having a sign held up that said “COLLECT”, an actual hymn was sung by the band that was relevant and actually had better content than most of the praise songs, and the sermon on the Bride of Christ was excellent theologically. The problem was that I spent the whole time during the sermon looking at the pastor in his jeans, sneakers, and tee wondering if he would dare show up to a family wedding in that attire.
I think this comes soooo close to saying it but doesn’t… what people really want is an encounter with the divine. I go to church because I want an encounter with God. I want that relationship. This is the only way people are going to come to church and stay. You can package and brand and test market and update but if people do not have that encounter with the divine there is no reason to stay. The scary part is that Satan will use all sorts of other tactics to copy an encounter with the divine and because people haven’t had an authentic encounter, they will mistake what Satan offers as such.
WesleyAnglican:
I’d love to hear you expand on your “pastor in his jeans, sneakers, and tee” comment, and have others chime in as well. Is it possible to dress that way (as a pastor) for a Sunday service and yet exhibit reverence for God and his Word as well? I think it depends on the context.
For the record, I preached in Crocks and shorts last month, although only at the night service (khakis and a polo at the three morning services).
Utah Benjamin:
I know this pastor very well. He and I were friends in seminary and had many of the same classes. I know his reverence for God and his Word and it is beyond question. However, his dress did not demonstrate that. I know for a fact that he would dress up more for a meeting with his Bishop or for a friend’s wedding. My question is, why does God deserve any less?
I know we live in a chronically casual society but I know he owns better clothes. And I know he would not take his wife out for a special date in those same clothes. Whether we like it or not, what we wear makes a difference in how we act. This pastor may have enough sense to make sure what he is wearing is clean and presentable but his example leads others without that sense to think that barely there shorts are appropriate for worship.
Would I eject someone from worship for wearing those things? No. But I’d find out if it was because they didn’t have anything better (and maybe provide it for them) or whether they just didn’t think about it. The church needs to be open and welcoming but that doesn’t mean anything goes.
Thanks, WesleyAnglican. Here’s what I’m trying to get at, and perhaps it’s driving us too far off topic: what theological principles govern how pastors should dress when they preach? Or for that matter, which ones govern what we allow people to experience on a Sunday morning at church? I love these conversations, because I really want to be a faithful pastor. And they are very fruitful conversations when we think through the issues theologically. Too many times we respond to these discussions emotionally and without really thinking (e.g. “You can’t tell me what to wear; you’re out of touch!” or “I was raised to respect God by dressing up for church!”). Or perhaps it’s just me that does that.
For instance, we intentionally dress down on Sunday nights, because that service is designed to introduce people to church and to Jesus who perhaps are skeptical of established religion or have had a bad experience with it, as can be common in our state. But unless there’s a specific reason NOT to, I always preach in at least khakis and a nice shirt, no matter what the congregation is wearing.
I don’t think you are off topic. Theologically I come from a place that understands worship to be an act that lifts us from the earthly realm into the heavenly where we participate with the saints and angels before the throne of the Most High God. As such, being the sinful human that I am, I come with my sins confessed and forgiven and clothed in the finest I have knowing that it is only a pale imitation of how I will be clothed in Eternity.
My point was that there was a disconnect between what the pastor was preaching on (the Bride of Christ and the Marriage of the Lamb) and how he was dressed and how the service was constructed. That makes me wonder if the dress and service were more marketing than theologically sound.
WesleyAnglican:
[blockquote]That makes me wonder if the dress and service were more marketing than theologically sound.[/blockquote]
Quite right. This happens far too much.
I feel so uncool (and to tell the truth I am very warm) when I celebrate and preach in an alb, cincture and stole. I try to let the Gospel speak for itself while pointing out that feeding on so much of what passes for spirituality today may lead to starvation. And usually does. Should I consider a sermon series on Eat, Pray, Love?
Citation from WesleyAnglican (#11>)
” I know for a fact that he [parish priest] would dress up more for a meeting with his Bishop or for a friend’s wedding. My question is, why does God deserve any less?”
My short answer is YES.
About 40-50 years ago “dressing down” became vogue for church goers. As I remember, it was done to make church more of a welcoming place for those who didn’t have dress clothes and/or were adverse (primarily due to reverse class predjudice) to wearing dress clothes.
Such “dressing down” is not neccessarily a bad thing if the end result is the removal of an impediment to bringing a person to Salvation.
However, I also remember, that 40 to 50 years ago, many people of limited means made a strong effort to “dress up” to show respect when the occasion, in their mind, required that. “Dressing up” did not mean having the finest clothes in a group, it displayed an individual’s effort to do his/her best at “dressing up.” And that person’s effort at “dressing up” was respected, regardless of how well that person was able to “dress up.”
But today’s “dressing down’ for Sunday’s ‘main church services’ does show disrespect.
I think that it shows disrespect when a person who knows that he/she has it within his/her means to “dress up” for Sunday worship doesn’t so so.
There are a lot of rationalizations for thoughtlessly or deliberately “dressing down” for Sunday worship, but they don’t ‘hold water.’
Excuse me!
Please change
“My short answer is YES.”
to read
“NO, He deserves far more.”
Wasn’t it CS Lewis who famously held that those who wed the spirit of the age will find themselves a widow in the next?
On the subject of dress in church all I can say is that I am “old school.” I live in California but am from New York. Thus I feel a bit like I have been exiled from Rome to the frontiers of the Empire with all that entails.
I am also Orthodox though, and that means there are limits, even in Cali. In some O parishes and jurisdictions (the Russian Church Abroad comes to mind) those limits can be quite strict. We sometimes joke about the “pants nazis,” the old babushkas who won’t allow women into the church unless their heads are covered and they are wearing a skirt below the knees and no skin showing on the arms above the elbows. (No, I’m not kidding.)
That’s not real common, but it’s also not unknown.
But even in the most casual O parishes I don’t see the kind of dress one finds in some churches where people look like they were on the way to the beach or gym and stopped off as an afterthought. And it goes without saying there is nothing trendy about our services. If you don’t like 5th century… move along.
In ICXC
John
Although Christianity should neither be easy, or trendy or “popular” what she is implying is that it isn’t bought or sold. What’s popular and trendy often includes buying things.
But it seems that the Gospel should be compelling. It can be in new technologies; it can be in places outside of church; it is there in the world, changing it and transforming it.
So my question is, what makes a chausible – which had a particular function at a particular time – more holy than jeans and a tie? Plenty of people preach in traditional garb heretical messages.
If Paul were living now, he’d be on Facebook and Twitter. And he’d know when to dress up and when to dress down so that people would not lose their faith.
How much of this “Wannabe Cool Christianty” is being attempted in the Continuing Episcopalian Movement? Convergentism lends itself to this.
Being the Rector of a 1928 BCP parish in a big, old, beautiful downtown parish we get a influx of young people every year who want authentic “Church” for their wedding. The retention rate of these people, even though they attend regularly for 6 to 12 months before the big day, attend Alpha, and some even are baptized here in the process, is about 1 in 6 couples. This generation senses what is the ‘real thing’, but they are consumers, not disciples. They pick and choose without committing. The challenge is to disciple them and beat the “attend the church of your choice” consumer mentality and replace it with a thirst for Truth.
There is a line somewhere that every pastor has to uncover, I think. The line between aiming for trendiness, and going where the people are. The article cites L.A.’s Mosaic Church meeting in a night club, for example. If it’s the church I’m thinking of, they actually five different locations and they didn’t choose the Mayan Whatever because it was cool. They chose it because it was where the people are. If we insist on fishing where we want to fish with the bait and other tools that we want to use we may be “right” but we’re not going to catch any fish.
The argument isn’t rock music vs. 1662 prayer book. There’s not going to be a single liturgy or style that is going to be right. But we have to stop thinking that all the “stuff” from the English Reformation is ALL “the things that last” or ALL “authentic” etc.
I think the question might be, what is the difference between Worship and Evangelism? While certainly evangelism can take place in the process of worship it is primarily a service from the faithful directed toward God. And while there can be worshipful moments during evangelistic events, these are moments to tell the Good News to those who haven’t heard.
I can give a little bit more leeway to Evangelistic events (although we still need to be sure that we are driven more by the Great Commission than Marketing). Worship, however, is the primary duty of the Body of Christ, and [i]should[/i] have a different flavor.
23: Yes but “wannabe cool” Christianity is not just about worship style.
#21, Stjohnsrector,
Your parish wouldn’t be St. John’s, Savannah, would it? My family and I worship there whenever we’re at Hilton Head and are always struck with what a well dressed, joyful, reverent, welcoming congregation we find. It is so refreshing, and the services are of surpassing beauty.
#23 Weslyanglican,
AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!
#25 – evan miller.
Nope. St. John’s Church in Detroit http://www.stjohnsdetroit.org