Four questions about cultural relevance in church

I’m not an avid blogger, but I felt this needed to be written. My thoughts on this may very well be completely flawed and misinformed but these are reflections about observations I’ve made after my diverse experience with the spectrum of Christian churches.

Having been to churches with virtually every approach to the question of relevance over the past 5 years, I’ve noticed some common themes and some big differences. And to the church that would go to any end in the struggle to be relevant, I would ask these questions:

1. WHO IS YOUR AUDIENCE? WHAT DOES “RELEVANCE” EVEN MEAN IN YOUR COMMUNITY?

This is bound to vary a lot, but I would really hope that every church has a focus on reaching those I’ll call “unchurched.” And these people are going to have certain stereotypes of Christianity based on their experiences, so it’s our job in ministry to show them that we’re not into “Christian” things more than we’re about Christ. From a cultural standpoint, we’ve historically been a pretty odd, cliquey bunch. We have our own words, our own lingo, our own hangout places, our own radio stations, you name it. And ironically, the “relevant” church has just as many as the traditional church, and there are just as many striking differences between “relevant culture” and popular culture as there are with the more traditional, maybe even more.

2. AT WHAT POINT DOES “RELEVANCE” TURN INTO WATERED DOWN CHRISTIANITY?

We’re trying to make Christianity look attractive to the unchurched, but at what cost? We’re trying to meet them at their level but drive the exact same points home every Sunday. And this is just my observation on the subject, but the things that are talked about on Sunday mornings have more likely than not already been ingrained deep into the heads of those disinterested in church. And as powerful as understanding just how great God’s free gift of salvation is, that’s not really something that your average Joe can quantify. Nor does singing the line “Oh, happy day, happy day, your washed my sin away” cognitively register in their heads at all. The songs we sing in churches need to be multi-faceted, and actually drive people to think. Hymns and archaic songs have their own stereotypes that I’ll go into later, but there’s a plethora of songs written today that speak to humanity’s inner need for God that aren’t even written by “Christian” bands.

I’ll give Mumford & Sons as the obvious example. I’m still finding layers of their music that I hadn’t noticed through years of listening. Switchfoot is another example. You’ve heard the “God shaped vacuum in every man’s heart” phrase thrown around. These bands actually speak to that vacuum in a way that makes people WANT to fill it, rather than singing overtly Christian tunes full of all the stereotypes they’ve been taught to hate, ultimately turning them off to Jesus and leaving them unsatisfied and lost without the God they don’t realize they need so very much.

3. ARE WE “STARVING” THE CHURCHED?

This is a big problem in my church. We’re trying to be a missional church with a focus on relevance and reaching the demographic I just described, but there are old-timers who make their disapproval known at every opportunity. Today my uncle preached on the two different types of “lost” people, and this type of jaded, pious and unsatisfied individual is largely analogous to the older brother in Jesus’ parable of the Prodigal Son. They complain about not singing the songs and old hymns they grew up with during Sunday morning worship, or grumble that they’re not being fed as Christians of a higher caliber and with a bigger “appetite” for spiritual things than our brothers and sisters who are still new believers or those who haven’t yet expressed interest in being in relationship with Jesus. We’re all seeking God, none of us are where He wants us to be, and none of us really have the right to judge anyone else because we’re “better Christians” than them.

On the flip-side, I find it ironic that that the depth and authenticity of traditional Christianity is something decidedly lacking in churches today, though there’s a necessary dichotomy of relevance and authenticity that’s hard to balance. To a large extent, traditional Christianity had a very different set of goals than modern evangelical Christianity. Most if not all of the community went to the local church and believed the same things as everyone else. At that time, to be missional inevitably meant you were going to a foreign country and teaching Jesus’ message to people who had literally never heard it before. Today most people have heard it, they just don’t want to have anything to do with it, because of the many stereotypes that plague modern Christianity. Conforming to those only gives people more of a reason to ditch God altogether.

4. WHAT ARE PEOPLE DRAWN TO IN A CHURCH?

Whether Christian or otherwise, I’d argue that people are drawn to authenticity. The ability to be different, yet still be true to who you are and what you believe, is such a rare quality among churches these days, but intrigues people and makes them want to experience more and learn what this group of people is all about.

It’s possibly to be authentic and utterly abrasive. Look at Westboro Baptist Church, or the Ku Klux Klan, or people who bomb abortion clinics–you get my drift. Holy crap do they have it wrong. Their authenticity does nothing for them because the foundation of what they do and believe is a lie.

The foundation of Christianity is not a lie, its the greatest truth imaginable. And yet we abandon its depth to stay relevant and lose our authenticity in the process. Please can we show our fellow man that we are really seeking God as much as they are? Can we strive to be different and yet fully and completely authentic?

Can we be a relevant church without compromise?