• SUBSCRIBE
• Welcome to Lone Prairie!
• SHOP
• ABOUT
• HIRE ME
• COMICS
• DOWNLOADS
• FREE STUFF

Links to this post:

  <$BlogBacklinkTitle$>  

<$BlogBacklinkSnippet$>
posted by <$BlogBacklinkAuthor$> @ <$BlogBacklinkDateTime$>

Create a Link

40 Comments:

I don't know you, but my former pastor sent me this blog post. Thank you for writing it. I know in large part it speaks for me.

Doug in Nashville

By  Doug Hannah, at August 6, 2008 10:19 AM  

Why I quit reading this about halfway down:

You were "enraged" by baggy jeans and flip flops. "Enraged?" In So Cal we all have several pairs of flip flops whether we are Christians or not. So the pastor likes coffee, what's so wrong with a paper cup that you wanted to dump the coffee on his head? Not to sure about the Dakotas, but in So Cal this pastor looks normal, not "trendy." What kind of freakish attire would you like him to wear?

"The wrath of man works not the righteousness of God."

And why arc off on children's ministry? When 85% of all Christians come to Christ before the age of 14 its not a bad ministry to focus on. So that's right about where I quit reading. Somebody seemed over-offended, but hey, that's trendy in a lot of churches.

Sorry the church you visited want's all about you.

By  john, at August 6, 2008 4:24 PM  

Too bad John can't read a whole blog. People fail to realize that what is normal in So Cal becomes a fad in the Mid West. I read the NextGen article and would agree with the blogger about the finger in the wind insincerity of the modern day churches.

By  ncktfc, at August 6, 2008 4:35 PM  

"People fail to realize that what is normal in So Cal becomes a fad in the Mid West."

What does that sentence mean? Does it mean we shouldn't wear flop flops? They are very functional when it is sunny and 72. Does it mean Midwesterners shouldn't because there they are a fad?

"Why, then, critise your brother's actions, why try to make him look small? We shall all be judged one day, not by each other's standards or even our own, but by the standard of Christ. . . . It is to God alone that we have to answer for out actions." (Romans 14:11-12)

By  john, at August 6, 2008 5:02 PM  

Thanks, Julie. Spot on. FYI, John: the article is not about flip flops, SoCal fads, coffee, or children's ministry. It is about the modern church's sad "phoniness, or trendiness, or sameness." It is about its obsession with "cultural relevance" all the while revealing its "cultural emptiness." It is about the seemingly insatiable appetite for piffle, drivel, and swill that thrusts embarrassingly awful books like The Shack to the top of the bestseller lists.

By  George Grant, at August 6, 2008 5:39 PM  

I can not help myself...

I might go to church if there were Big Trains served!

By  Anna, at August 6, 2008 5:53 PM  

It has been my experience in blogging and commenting on blogs for over six years that you should never admit to reading only half of a blog post and then shoving a nonsensical foot in your mouth in the comments section.

I would note that there seem to be two things happening in the discussion of this post at the WorldMag online blog, and they seem to consist of:

1. A critique of my emotional state

2. A critique of my meandering writing in this particular post.

Regarding #1, that is neither here nor there. The issue is valid, as is seen in those identifying with an underlying message. I have written long and hard about the issue of emotion and logic in debates on this blog, and will let you locate those posts.

Regarding #2, I certainly had no idea anyone but the few readers here would stumble upon the post, as as such, wrote it quickly. Had I known it would garner this attention, I would have worked on fine-tuning and editing it. As it is, it is a good reminder that in blogging, all posts must be sharp no matter if you have three readers or 300.

I think, if you believe the entire essay to be about outward appearances such as flip flops, you have a remedial grasp of the larger issue.

By  Julie R. Neidlinger, at August 6, 2008 8:03 PM  

Anna, you're such a goof! Ha ha.

By  Julie R. Neidlinger, at August 6, 2008 8:32 PM  

Thanks for writing this Julie; much of it expresses my convictions about church--I just haven't been so bold to say it. As a single woman in my late 20s, recently relocated, finding a church was the hardest part of my move. After about 6 months, I was about to give up and be a "bedside Baptist" with Adrian Rogers online. Sigh.

The church I'm attending now has many of the flaws you wrote about, but it's small enough still to be a church community for me. I'm slowing fitting in (and VERY grateful they don't have a singles group--that thought makes ME want to throw up! I'm attending the young marrieds class haha and having a blast!) I dread the day if/when it grows--develops a veneer of contemporary phoniness--and I have to find another church.

By  Laura, at August 6, 2008 9:26 PM  

Thank you for this article. I am a seventeen-year-old young man and I strongly agree with you. With the tidal wave of Islam resurging on the West, my generation has no choice but to destroy this obsequious pseudo-Christianity. Regaining Christ's original vision for His Church is imperative if Christendom is to survive.

By  Jon, at August 6, 2008 10:47 PM  

Great piece Julie. I appreciate your sincerity and honesty. Thank you for taking the time to post your thoughts for us to read and ponder.

I used to be one of those youth pastors and helped create this vicious cycle. Thankfully, though some extraordinary circumstances, I matured. Now I am deeply saddened to think about the phoniness that I helped to propagate.

By  shawnmmay, at August 6, 2008 11:01 PM  

Julie,
Can I get an Amen? My recommendation is to try out a small neighborhood mainline church. Methodist, Presbyterian, Disicple, whatever. These churches have had smaller memberships for quite a while now and have learned to live in multi-generational community, much like your home church. I wish you luck in your search.

By  RevHez, at August 7, 2008 2:45 PM  

I agree with you wholeheartedly. Adult children make me want to puke. I would, however, advise you to avoid using phrases like: "it really sucks" as you sound like those whom you are criticizing.

Gutter slang ("sucks") has become the norm thanks to the idiocy to which you refer.

By  Richard G. Williams, Jr., at August 7, 2008 4:11 PM  

This is a very insightful article. Thank you for taking the time to think about it and share your thoughts. It is truly unfortunate how right you are.

Samuel in North Carolina

By  samuelatgilgal, at August 7, 2008 4:30 PM  

Julie,

I understand exactly what you're talking about. We used to have the American Civil Religion, but it's been replaced by the American Suburban Religion. If we thought the first was a problem, the second is a travesty. You encountered the travesty.

By  dle, at August 7, 2008 7:54 PM  

DLE, I was hoping you'd show up. You have written similarly-themed things, and I appreciate your perspective.

Richard, regarding my use of the word "sucks"...you're right. That sucks. I also used the word "ass."

By  Julie R. Neidlinger, at August 7, 2008 8:32 PM  

Your article has helped me identify what I could not put my finger on for awhile now. Although I'm not prepared to cut of my appendage in order to present a more cogent response (okay, you can laugh now), I hope this does not throw us on the defensive so quick we loose all transparency.

The disgust you feel is shared by many, which is apparent in the responses here. It would be easier to deny that personal preferences came into play so we can skip right over that to find the deeper meaning, but nobody can make these assessments from a purely objective point of view. So we are all the sum of our experiences, and I realize this is geared to those that the Holy Spirit indwells. The other factor here is that Godly desire and passion for holiness. It's not focused on a judgement against personal style or the embrace of technology, but one that embodies the love for God that is so elevated that everything else is meaningless. Then we look around and surmise that nobody else seems to understand or worse, is interested in this intimate embrace of God Triune. We begin to feel the compassion for others and some sadness that they are seekers and not finders. The idea that there is to much worldly stimulation and fashion emphasis to focus on that nobody will ever see the point. The feeling that we are an endangered species in the body of Christ. We are.....offended.

Or is it that righteous anger, the same kind that Jesus displayed when driving the merchants out of the temple?

I don't want to spend my life working on the introspective, but I want to pinpoint what's going on, so we can identify the problem, find the solution, rally the troops and move forward in unity toward daily victory in the spiritual battle.

By  Kenny, at August 8, 2008 10:53 AM  

Spot on.
This has been a complaint of mine for a while now. I live in Australia, where the average age is 35, and yet most churches expend (and waste) enormous amounts of time and energy in catering to youth, and almost zero on addressing the needs and concerns of the most numerous sector of society, the very people who stay away from church in droves.
Multi-generational ministries and services are essential, and, as you have written so eloquently, ultimately the most effective way to build community.

By  Walter, at August 8, 2008 7:31 PM  

Julie (and others),
I'm a Pastor to Young Adults in a church of about 600 people. I've only been here about a year and a half and I'm trying to work for positive change in many of the areas you've mentioned. Here's my question: What does effective ministry to the group you are representing and speaking of "look like"? I know, like you, what it doesn't look like. But have any of you seen an effective ministry of this sort? I ask genuinely...not at all trying to make a point. Because many of what the world would call "successful" ministries to this age group are by the very kinds of people that are being criticized in this article. Any help you give a guy who is trying to reach this population who are leaving church? Thx.

By  Eric, at August 9, 2008 10:16 AM  

I love this.

By  Brian T. Murphy, at August 10, 2008 11:54 PM  

When the church finally realizes it doesn't "go" to church but "is" the church, we may see change in how we effect community.

Your post is right on. Many are coming to understand "church" has become a social and business community instead of what we are truly called to be. If only more would walk out and seek shelter from the storm.

By  nbta, at August 11, 2008 8:02 AM  

In reading what I was told, "a great blog", I was disenfranchised by your disenfranchised...ment ...ness. Okay, so I'm making up words, but my point is that our culture today has created the church you've experienced, precisely for the reasons you were dissatisfied. By choosing to disengage, critique, and otherwise isolate yourself, the problem grows worse. You have every right to be frustrated, but why not become the solution? I recently joined the officer's training class at my church because I couldn't handle the status quo and the cold disregard for relational ministry. I agree that trendy church stuff for the sake of being trendy and "hip" is really lame, but I think there's a much much bigger picture here. Christ came to build relationships, and the way that takes shape is different worldwide. I'm not condemning your disappointment, but I am saying that if all you are is offended, you have become part of the illness. The remedy is to fulfill God's calling to all His children to jump in with both feet and lead...with grace.

By  Aaron, at August 11, 2008 9:39 AM  

Suggestions to become part of the solution and not the problem are often bandied about.

The kicker is if the church hasn't gotten around to identifying that there is a problem, and continues on with status quo.

"I'm not condemning your disappointment, but I am saying that if all you are is offended, you have become part of the illness. The remedy is to fulfill God's calling to all His children to jump in with both feet and lead...with grace."

Your remedy is vague, and provides anyone reading with little help. To fulfill God's calling? What if that is to get out of these huge churches? What if that is to write about the problem? You could certainly say I jumped in, on this topic, with full feet and have attempted to lead with grace despite some unusual responses from complete strangers who know only what I have told them.

Being disappointed is very different than being "offended", with the latter being an excuse for self-indignation and the means to disengage and not have guilt about it. I am not willing to disengage (hence the last paragraph about not wanting to church hop, etc.) and this post is less about offense than a sickening feeling inside that something is terribly amiss for people like me. (I did not claim to speak for ALL churchgoers. This is important to remember, that this is not a blanket post: I am speaking for people like me who are disgusted by certain consumerist, shallow aspects of our culture, and are very troubled that the church has decided to drag them in and use them. That is the person I am speaking for. I believe there is some confusion that I'm saying this applies to everyone, and some believers are put off since they like the larger churches with all the accessories.)

I believe I have provided some suggestions, particularly regarding age segregation and youth-ministry-as-entertainment, i.e. stop doing that. Rethink what we think is necessary and question our definition of what is working.

That is, of course, if a church is interested in retaining people like me; if they decide to cut their losses and keep their current model...that's their decision. But people like me will walk out the door. And I'm just telling others who do not understand how people like me think and why it is we're walking.

I am not asking people to think this a "great" blog, nor did I make the claim. What this particular post is (and there are other posts on this site that are of different nature) is an honest look at something troubling and disappointing. I may not be at a place yet to provide happy solutions to satisfy everyone, but I am at a place in which I can at least identify something not right in my spirit. That's a first step that too many in the church aren't even willing to do yet.

"By choosing to disengage, critique, and otherwise isolate yourself, the problem grows worse."

I fail to see the logic in that statement, as it applies to what I wrote. It makes no sense in that light. Critique is necessary, and the one doing the critiquing will always face...criticism from those saying critique has no benefit. I have not suggested to disengage in my beliefs, but rather how I do church and the "traditions" we've created.

And isolate? Suggestions for smaller groups and more personal relationships is anything but a call to isolation. Isolation happens more in a large, faceless crowd more than it does in a small group. I would propose that huge churches encourage isolation, on many different levels. Nowhere, however, do I give rise the suggestion that I would support people just sitting at home on their own and not meeting with a body of believers; on the contrary, if you look at the last part of the post.

By  Julie R. Neidlinger, at August 11, 2008 10:10 AM  

"...That is, of course, if a church is interested in retaining people like me; if they decide to cut their losses and keep their current model...that's their decision. But people like me will walk out the door. And I'm just telling others who do not understand how people like me think and why it is we're walking..."

The point I was trying to make (albeit not very succinctly or articulately) is that it's not about you or people like you or people like me. In Christ's eyes, we are at once nothing like each other and yet all the same. We are uniquely-made people, but we all have broken, sinful hearts that need the Gospel applied. I completely appreciate venting and lamenting the state of the American church. That is well-founded. Where I happen to disagree is on the feeling of fringe commitment that I thought I sensed from the post. I'm an advocate of action and involvement, and if you're not happy with the status quo, and you don't want to church hop...the best way to make change is to...well...make change. I understand that it's tough in a big church---I go to one myself. But the tough part for me is not making change, but rather graciously submitting to and praying for the authorities that God has placed over me in my church body.

To sum up, thank you, Julie, for making some ruckus about your distaste for neatly packaged "christianity". I am encouraged to read a contemporary's desire for good, old-fashioned relational ministry. Thank you, too, for your follow-up and clarification.

By  Aaron, at August 11, 2008 11:52 AM  

Great post, Julie. And who needs editors anyway? I would much rather see the point and the passion than a watered-down politically corrected up post.

By  Austin Bob, at August 11, 2008 1:33 PM  

"the best way to make change is to...well...make change. I understand that it's tough in a big church---I go to one myself. But the tough part for me is not making change, but rather graciously submitting to and praying for the authorities that God has placed over me in my church body."

I would have to say that this post is my way of working to make change.

There might also be a fine line between graciously submitting to those meant to be in authority over me, and carelessly wafting along unwilling or unable to make that change you so rightly mention as being needed. It's a tricky thing, knowing when it is time to submit, and when it is time to step out and say "stop and look."

I do note that this church is not what I consider my "church body" if we are using a definition of church as a building and the congregation that attends it. My church body, in that definition, is elsewhere.

By  Julie R. Neidlinger, at August 11, 2008 2:06 PM  

Aaron said: "But the tough part for me is not making change, but rather graciously submitting to and praying for the authorities that God has placed over me in my church body."

I see this as a real problem. First, we need to re-translate and find the real definition of the words "submit" and "authority". Leaders should be servants and not viewed or held as "authority" over anything. It's like calling a "pastor" a pastor or really "shepherd". Jesus said there is only ONE Pastor...and He was it. Yet, we call those in "authority" our pastor, elders, whatever...the evangelical version of the "Catholic church" understanding of having a pope to replace the Word of God.

Submitting comes when we are led by the Spirit and the Spirit reveals to us when someone is speaking a word and it is confirmed by the Word...not because someone holds a position in a church.

By  nbta, at August 11, 2008 9:40 PM  

My husband sent me this link--he thought I would be interested because I just started a blog myself about similar issues (with a different slant). If I'm reading the original posting correctly, the main issue is not jeans, coffee cups, baggy pants--it's about image vs. substance--it's about discerning and living out what Jonathan Edwards refers to as 'true religion.' I am passionate about this subject because of what I have experienced over the years (yes, our experiences definitely shape us).

I became a Christian during the heyday of the Jesus movement (tells you how old I am--smile). The young church I was a part of became known as 'cutting edge' church mainly because we were trying to get past phony religion . . we were looking for the real, the authentic. . . we wanted to 'get back to NT Christianity.' For a while, it was incredible--relational, close-knit, creative, dynamic, exciting. . .we had many visitors who wanted to come and see the 'new thing' that God was doing. Funny/sad, but over the years, we ended up becoming just as institutionalized as the older churches we disdained originally. Even sadder is that we bought into some things that ended up producing a weird kind of psuedo-spirituality. On top of it, we had a faulty view of authority which caused us to submit ourselves to somethings we shouldn't have submitted to. We ended up going through some very confusing, very troubling times. Long and short of it is that it provoked me to start studying Scripture and history more to try and understand some of the forces that had shaped/affected our church. Following the historical trail to discover origins of certain beliefs/practices, has allowed me to see a bit more now where the phony stuff started--of course, there's always been some degree of it in the church, but a mega-dose flooded American Christianity back at the end of the 18thc/beginning of the 19thc when a new brand of evangelism/revivalism began to flourish. Won't go into all of the details but some man-centered mentalities, doctrines, and practices came into play that opened the door for an approach to Christianity that involved emotional/financial manipulation, image over substance, sentimentality, etc. . . thanks to a new brand of itinerant evangelists/revivalists these things spread quickly and widely and have left an indelible imprint on today's church. I'm amazed at how much of what I see today can be traced back to these roots! No wonder there is such a 'mush' of ideas/practices in contemporary Christianity today.

The problem is that, as J. Edwards points out--when undetected false/counterfiet religion gets mixed in with the true, it sets believers against one another in a 'great heat of spirit' . . .which leads to 'vain jangling' about all kinds of things. . .which leads believers to become confused and torn. . .which leads some to drop out/fall by the wayside . . and which breeds atheism and/or other false religions. In his words, the consequences of undiscerned counterfeit religion is 'inexpressibly dreadful.' One of the main questions that I have been interested in for several years now is--what constitutes 'true religion'? In JE's opinion, until we agree on this, our 'warm debates' about other issues won't come to much.

Anyway--thanks for the conversation--motivates me to want to keep following the trail . . .

By  Ann Weaver, at August 12, 2008 9:27 AM  

I think it's great that you're actually engaging in your own blog, something that many bloggers quickly forget, preferring to stir the pot and move on.

So, this is the stand up and take notice moment, maybe like the same moment education had years ago... and rebirthed Classical Christian Education. The solution is ideal, yet counterculture. I'm interested in hearing solutions. How do we rightly move forward as the church (body of Christ)?

By  khpro, at August 12, 2008 1:24 PM  

Great post. I work for a church in NYC where you're an oddball if you're married with kids. We like sarcasm and good music and hate the Olive Garden. Any pastor drinking a latte during the sermon is fired on the spot. Sure, the rent's a little high, but I think you'd like it.

By  Tom, at August 12, 2008 3:22 PM  

Sister Julie,

I think you are right on target. As for John, check the stats coach. The SBC baptizes more children than adults. Why is that?

Let me tell you why. I was once one of them. For over 25 years I walked around as headed for hell as the day is long. Why? Because I was manipulated into walking down an aisle and saying some superstitious prayer.

But praise be to God....one night all alone....the LORD brought me to my knees in true repentance, true vexation over my sin, true godly sorrow about who I was. The change of Ezekiel 36, then took place. It didnt take an altar call with some sad music playing....it took a Bible in hand, reading the book of Mark....in a bedroom of my house, The Scripture alone was sufficient for my regeneration by The Holy Spirit. No soft emotional music was playing....and the prayer was from the heart.

We should be praying for all those young ones that are likely false conversions. Woe to those church leaders who are allowing this manipulation....our heaviest petition should be for them.

So Julie, this is why I think you are so on the money. You see, the real issue isnt the sandals and the coffee. The real issue is that today's post modern church, and even some the non-post modern ones, HAVE NO CLUE AS TO GOD'S HOLINESS!! NONE! They treat God as if He is their buddy that they can hang out with and just be buds. Anyone with a brain can read the story of Moses and the burning bush and get a sense of just how Holy God is. If Moses had been holding a cup of coffee, I imagine God would have told him to disgard it, much like his sandals.

What the modern churches have lost is preaching and teaching about sin, judgement, righteousness, regeneration and justification. For the modern church, it's not about God, it's about them. And yeah, 6 things are an abomination to LORD, even 7....and the first one on the list is PRIDE.

I am not saying that you cant go to church in your blue jeans and flip flops. My point is simply, God is Holy beyond our comprehension and He desires our reverance, fear and Worship of Him. Not idolizing the great tasting coffee you carried in from the welcome center.

At the end of the day, most modern churches I have attended suffer from one thing...idolatry. They have created a god that suits themselves.....heck, I even had one guy tell me "so what, if a woman wants to show a little leg in church, it's just today's culture in church"....oh yeah? So I suppose God has changed and now only winks at sin?...I think not....seems the LORD said somewhere "I am God, I change not.".....and didnt Jesus say, if you look with lust you have already committed adultry in your heart?.....a "little leg" huh?

They say that an idle mind is the devil's workshop....I am more inclined to say that the idle church is worse.....those that are idle by not teaching sound doctrine are creating idols instead....I believe this satan's biggest weapon at the moment....and it's inside church walls!

2Timothy 4:3,4 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.

In Christ alone.

By  DefenderOfTruth, at August 12, 2008 10:20 PM  

"...they're new and we want to get to know them."

The only thing better than getting to know someone new is getting to know them better.

I think what you are describing is a desire for genuine hospitality. And that, dear lady, is lacking in the 'lame church'.

May God bless you with a Church body who will stick close to you… like brotherly glue.

al sends

By  Al, at August 13, 2008 7:45 AM  

I think you've written a very stirring piece. And the memoir manner of it really pulled me in as a reader. And I think perhaps its a genre issue that is causing people to miss the emotive rhetoric of the piece.

Anyway I really enjoyed it, thanks. I think you've raised some real issues some of which are the nature of what an attractional church does to community; when and where should the church brand and what happens when multi-site churches start parroting franchise principals without really considering the theological and social implications; as well as the transgenerational fall out in the churches 'a la carte' ministry model.

I do think some of the commentators here have offered you much to consider: like the matter of cultural norm versus just seeking to be trendy; as well as the need to think strategically in use of budget and who to reach with it. I hope you can garner something from this comment chain, rather than it just being another comment chain in the life of a blogger.

The only critical advice I have to offer beyond what those have offered above is that you perhaps consider that 'Christian bohemia' is just as trendy as 'Christian corporate' and that you chasten your critic of other believers in light of that. In this regard the book "Weird Like Us" by Ann Powers was really helpful to me personally. She's not writing about the church as much as she is about public square sub-cultures but it was really helpful nonetheless.

If you're in the greater Atlanta area and you're looking for a church that will go to Dairy Queen with you after (we go to Brusters here) please don't hesitate to check out East Lanier Community Church. We're small, filled with blue-collar joes and janes, and we dig just enjoying one anothers presence. We meet in a rented decorative warehouse - basic nuts and bolts setup; and spend at least half as much time enjoying one another in the foyer as we do in the service.

Tony Stiff

By  Jerico, at August 13, 2008 9:46 AM  

I am suspicious of any contemporary Christ-follower who doesn't find the standard Evangelical culture just a bit insipid, consumer-driven, inwardly focused, vapid, etc. The modern Evangelical church is man-centered, not in awe of the glory of exalted, almighty God. It is a fix-it and feel-good place more than is a family devoted to magnifying and glorifying God and learning what it is to enjoy Him forever.

It is, in short, not what we signed up for. We read this book called the Bible, and there's all these incredible things in there. Things like the overwhelming Grace of God, and a community ready to sacrifice whatever they needed to build up each other, and a real fire to go to the ends of the earth to proclaim that Jesus is THE WAY to the Father.

One of the reasons I'm posting a comment is that I was having some trouble parsing your thoughts in this paragraph:

I believe what I believe -- my Christian faith -- not because of tradition or because I was raised that way. Not because I want fire insurance or hell-avoidance. Not because I want to find a group or place to belong.

OK, so far - I'm tracking with you. I might have a few comments and questions if this were a dialog, but I nod and go on...

I believe it on my own, I believe it to be real, I believe it to be important and valid, and I believe the way we have made Christianity out to be is completely wrong. And that's why I have such a hard time going to church as it is now done.

So, the first part - you're telling me you don't believe what you do because of these extrinsic things. OK - I don't think they should all be cast off without a glance, but I'll give you your breathing room here. However, the second half leaves me...not understanding not only the what but the why of your beliefs. Why do you believe these things? The easy (and yes, mostly correct) Evangelical answer is "I believe what I believe because the Bible says so."

I guess what I'm getting at is this - we all have a template in our hearts and minds about what the Kingdom is supposed to look like (and, by extension, what our churches should model). Some of that template is from what we see and "experience" in scripture. Some is influenced by witness of conscience and the working of the Holy Spirit in our lives. However, each of us has been influenced by various cultural influences over the years, which is why I raise a Spock eyebrow over the "not because of tradition or how I was raised" etc. I appreciate wanting to make it your own - I certainly do. The paradox of the Christian life is that it is both intensely personal and uniquely communal. It has to be real in you, but it also has to be real around you as well - in the people you fellowship and live with.

Well, I don't know if I can practically solve your struggle. I think it is good you're struggling. At the risk of sounding like a John Piper fan-boy (OK, I am - God has used his ministry to focus my heart ever more intently on our Savior), I have found great encouragement in the Desiring God ministries, and would recommend reading through the online version of Desiring God as an encouragement in finding a place that puts Him above all others.

By  GLMeece, at August 13, 2008 6:20 PM  

Now we know why we have different churches, all trying to reach people with the life-changing reality of Jesus, who, in his own words said "for whoever is not against us is for us" (Mark 9:40).
It takes different kinds of churches to reach different kinds of people. Go to Kenya, China, Brazil, Vietnam, LA, NYC, Dallas and see different cultures being culturally relevant and proclaiming the gospel of The Kingdom. Every tribe and tongue will be in heaven...and, thankfully, they won't all look life my tribe. One more quote from Jesus, "By this (love) all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another" (John 13:35). Nothing in hear about flip flops, coffee containers, marketing strategies, regional preferences, etc.

By  Peter Horn, at August 13, 2008 7:54 PM  

Thanks for the article. It expresses much of what my wife and I are trying to grapple with. We've recently left (moved to a different city) a family church of about 200 people that is decidedly not trendy and doesn't want to grow large but to plant more churches so we can remain a family of believers.

One of the things that attracted us is the fact that the "youth" don't all congregate together but they will greet and respect and sit next to the 80 year-old widower and talk with them like they were their grandfather. You may not believe me, but there are no cliques, but this is a church with a good spread of ages who desire the holiness of God and want to spur one another on in Him. We don't have flashing lights and lattes to attract unbelievers, but steadily and faithfully preaching the gospel. Just last Christmas, more than 250 non Christians came to a series of talks about Jesus. It's real, and they appreciate the honesty. We don't try to WOW them, just faithfully share the Gospel. We're sad we had to leave and we visit our family every time we can. We've settled in a new church in a new (very small) town and recently asked by someone in another church where we were fellowshipping. I told them and they said, "I've heard good things about that church; I've heard they preach the Gospel." It's a sad indictment of the state of our churches that preaching the Gospel is something out of the ordinary. This church has grown from 6 believers to regular attendance of about 40-50 in just 6 months. It's amazing what faithfulness in preaching the Gospel will do without lattes and lights when accompanied by the love of God and His righteousness and love for people who are sinners like us.

Julie, we hope that you find a church like ours.

By  Michael, at August 14, 2008 3:53 AM  

Hey Julie,

You said...

"The fact that this is not only actually successful in appealing to people, but attracts them, also disgusts me."

And, whether anyone likes it or not the approach actually works. People are ministered to and the lost are reached.

But, having said that, I couldn't help but smile (not laugh) at your post. It was this observation, about the effectiveness of the approach, that made me rethink what I do and how I do it...or at least my attitude toward new ideas.

I am uncomfortable in some of the more public friendly settings but I am learning to at least try something thoroughly before rejecting it. That is really hard to do.

Obviously, I don't know the details of your background (not asking either - I read your eula) but the hardest thing I have ever done is change from one church to another and the two churches involved were identifical in most ways.

The biggest obstacle to change is not the agent of change or the nature of the change taking place but the object being changed. We don't like it especially when it confronts our entrenched expectations.

Anyway, I wish you well in your search for a church.

If you haven't done so yet, read "Divine Nobodies" by Jim Palmer. His perspective on "church" is very interesting.

By  EnnisP, at August 14, 2008 4:18 PM  

This post has been removed by the author.

By  Will, at August 14, 2008 7:34 PM  

Could I just say, one last time before I close the comments on this post, that if you think the point was about flip flops and coffee and trendiness per se, then:

1. I either wrote it badly, for which I apologize.

2. You, the reader, are reading it badly, for which I apologize.

Please read the other links I have provided in the updates on this post lest you think it is merely a case of "Dakota" being behind the times and new to coffee.

Those items in the photo in World Magazine were merely the thing that set me off but not the gist of what I am trying to say. Thank you for not being sarcastic about what is or is not trendy in different parts of the country compared to the what is or is not trendy in North Dakota. Thank you for not over-simplifying what I said with the initial paragraph which is what is being excerpted despite a large chunk of other text which follows it. It has nothing to do with that, or only that. I am aware that Jesus likely wore sandals. I do not need any more direct emails telling me so. At this point, it is merely insulting.

For the record:

This was not just a post about coffee and flip flops. Let. That. Drop.

By  Julie R. Neidlinger, at August 14, 2008 7:52 PM  

Comments on this post are now closed. All possible discussion on flip flops has likely been used up. Thank you.

By  Julie R. Neidlinger, at August 14, 2008 7:53 PM  

Post a Comment

LONE PRAIRIE STUDIES LINKS

Studies Home

Get Lone Prairie Studies on your cell phone!

SUBSCRIPTIONS

PREVIOUS POSTS

• I, Titanic.
• Two prayers.
• Struggle.
• Married to methods.
• Guise in disguise.
• Growing smaller.
• Christians and criticism.
• The question isn't the point.
• Taking up the cross.
• Refreshed.

ARCHIVES

ABOUT THIS BLOG

TIP JAR

TODAY'S HEADLINES

TOPICS

art

bible

bible studies

christianity

creation

critique

discussion

education

fall

guest blogging

health

history

homosexuality

idea generation

journals

language

literature

love

media

music

patriotism

personal

philosophy

post background

religion

relationships

science

teaching

unexplained

women

worship