I heard Billy Graham on the car radio last week and I got nostalgic. It was nostalgia for Christendom. The words by Billy Graham were verbatim as follows: (they were part of a radio spot by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association).
Too many think that you can go out and live the way you like. Go to church on Sunday, or perhaps go to some religious ritual that your church demands and everything will be all right, but it won’t. It’s wonderful to be a member of the church, it’s great to be baptized, it’s great to be confirmed, but that alone is not enough. Jesus said, “You must be born of the Spirit,” “you must be born again.”
The recording of these words can be found by clicking here and then scrolling down to the clip entitled “Church on Sunday.” I urge you to listen to these words. Feel the ethos. Wallow a little in the nostalgia for a time gone by. For these words reveal the by-gone age of protestant Christendom in North America, the golden years of evangelism (I realize some may not consider these years golden). These were the words as preached by Billy Graham in one of his many crusades (the very word ‘crusade’ bespeaks Christendom). I have no idea when the sermon was preached but, again, it played last week on the radio (it is ironic that the BGEA is playing this spot in Chicago in 2009). These words help us imagine the mindset of so many churches from the small Bible churches of the post WW1 generations all the way (I contend) to the current-day huge mega churches of evangelicalism. In virtually all evangelical people over the age of 60 there is this nostalgia for these feelings, this ethos, this world that was sure, so certain and grounded in the foundation of Christianity.
Of course, dramatic changes have taken place in our society. In just a short period of time we have gone from a Christendom North America during the Billy Graham crusade years of 1950′s to 1980′s to a post-Christendom where most of these words make little sense. Today, in many post-Christendom places in N America, THESE WORDS MAKE NO SENSE. Here, people in these post-Christendom contexts have not been baptized or confirmed. They receive no social benefits from going to church. They are not even looking for that. They do not believe going to church will save them. They are oblivious to the notion of “being saved.” Unless the hearers of this message by Billy Graham live in Dallas Texas or Atlanta Georgia, these words fall on deaf ears.
There is a line of continuity between the Billy Graham crusades of that day and much of current day evangelicalism. Whether it is in the local Bible church congregation or the large mega church, they both rely on a cultural ethos that lies behind these words by Billy Graham. It is a world that respects the Bible, believes in one God, and sees church as viable cultural institution. Here converts are described as people (usually coming out of some former initiation to Christianity) who make a personal commitment to Christ and have a personal relationship. Church is organized so as to attract people into its doors. The mega churches merely seek to do the Billy Graham thing with more relevancy/production value (it is ironic to see how a Billy Graham crusade basically put on a typical evangelical worship service in an outdoor service – complete with congregational singing, choir, special music, a testimony and a sermon by Billy Graham- and thousands came time after time). Even though the Graham ministry had a much broader ministry than this brief sound clip would indicate, by and large the majority of Crusade converts were Christendom converts, born and initiated by the European heritage churches, and seeking a vital faith. This in itself was a worthy ministry.
The times however changed. The last vestiges of Christendom lie in decay in large parts of the N American world. There are fewer and fewer people already initiated into Christianity needing to be “revived.” There are less and less Christendom pre-converts who need to be challenged to take their pre-disposed intellectual assent to a higher level of personal commitment. THE TIME OF CHRISTENDOM EVANGELISM HAS LARGELY PASSED. We must lead out of this nostalgia. It is the task of Missional leaders, authors, and seminary students to help lead what remains of the evangelical church (in the post Christendom contexts of N. America) out of the Christendom nostalgia.
Over the last two years, I have visited hundreds of pastors at gatherings of all kinds in the new territories of post Christendom. They are watching their churches dwindle, getting older and having less and less of a cultural relevance. They are watching the mega churches with bloated budget producing hyped-up programs steal any Christians that under the age of 40. Their single number one question is “how can I get young people to come to my church?” (obviously the wrong question for the context we are in). Many are just plain in shock. It is a post Christendom, post-attractional world.
I got to admit; I still get “goose bumps” listening to the dulcet tones of Billy Graham’s voice. The fruits of his many years of ministry are to be honored. I’m convinced however that this same nostalgia must somehow be addressed. Denominations that are closing churches faster than they can start them should read the writing on the wall. We should respect the Billy Graham generation. We should honor the dwindling churches for all their labors for Christ (and I am dead serious here). Then we should also transition our Christendom churches somehow (I have a few ideas for such a transition) into a missional disposition in the world. We need to lead past and out of the Christendom nostalgia. Perhaps playing this 60-second sound Billy Graham sound bite and talking about it in our congregations might be a beginning towards such ends.
P.S. I still hope to have my final post on Post Christendom evangelism up in the next few weeks.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Love it! Couldn’t agree more. It’s like a totally different frame of mind.
[...] does this mean and what are the implications? David Fitch has provided some great thoughts in a recent post (I’ve provided the full text [...]
Hi Dave,
Thank you for the respectful way you have spoken about Billy Graham and his ministry. I’ve sung in several of his choirs. My father and his friends were part of Youth for Christ, attending rallies at Moody Church when they were young. So respect for him and what he has done runs deep in me.
But I think I have witnessed what have been saying. I recently had a conversation with a friend and we were both speaking what we believed about the condition of people. Needless to say we were at odds in our beliefs. I quickly saw that I could not approach him as though I had the answer he needed. I believe he would have dismissed me as being condescending. (What good is winning a debate/being proved right, and losing a relationship?) So I am trying to make my life do the talking. and not just my life, but mine and my wife’s. I am praying that he will see what the Kingdom of God looks like through Victoria and I. (Fortunately the Holy Spirit enables us to be an example of the Kingdom
)
David,
I’m not arguing an either/or here, but just asking questions and thinking out loud. I hear what you are saying and think I agree. But others obviously do not. For example, James MacDonald is rallying the troups in Chicago to host a Harvest CRUSADE with Greg Laurie. This is the same thing that Graham did except you now have a contemporary outdoor worship service instead of the traditional one. And apparently it is working (however, you define that) or Laurie would not be doing these all over the country.
So has it changed as much as you think? Isn’t there enough “power” in the Word and Gospel alone that we can just “preach it?” Will God not do what God is going to do?
Also, maybe evangelism today is ineffective because we just don’t do it. We don’t trust the power of the gospel. So we hold back and emphasize relationship over proclamation and we never get to proclamation and no one “gets saved.” Could this be the problem?
I am just raising the questions because when I say the things you have said to people in “Christendom” I get these types of questions thrown at me.
What do yo think?
The question that comes to mind as I read your post is this.
If the word ‘saved’ (and all of the assumed baggage that is packed into it) no longer makes sense in our post-Christendom context how do we explain the concept of salvation outside of a Christendom bound vocabulary?
My initial thoughts lead to the re-appropriation of cultural vocabulary akin to Jesus and the early church; the word ‘gospel’ for example.
In order to be missional in precedence our evangelism must by a physical, mental, and spiritual engagement. I think we are beginning to understand a post-Christendom theology of presence/incarnation, I am just not sure that thinking in the realm of missional engagement of the intellect or heart are as far along.
Scott,
In regard to Harvest’s Crusade, the key question is what does it mean to say it is working? The only way I will be able to answer this question is to know who’s coming? why they are coming? and what are they hoping to accomplish? It would not surprise me that a Moody radio preacher could draw a crowd of Moody + listners (even parishioners) from across a wide spectrum of church experiences. Ask yourself however who listens to Moody? To me that would be Christendom. It would not surprise me either if there were many conversions of the kind that became dominant in Christendom. But there is less of that Christendom left especially in the NW suburbs of Chicago. And this Christendom is basically the monolopy of the three large mega churches of N W Suburbs. Check out the growth of actual Christians and churches in the NW suburbs for the past twenty five years and it has been basically nil, with smaller churches closing up while the mega churches have swelled (but capped off in the last five years), but the number of Christains staying even with pop growth.
As for the ineffectivenss of evangelism. I most certainty am advocating for a renewal of evangelism in post Christendom. My previous posts and the one to come on this subject hopefully helps towards an engaged post Christendom evangelism.
Thanks for commenting!!
David,
Thanks for this post. I share your sense of nostalgia. I grew up in a church where Billy’s words made sense, and I am now a pastor of a church where his words would make sense for a majority of the members.
But I also share your sense that “we should also transition our Christendom churches somehow (I have a few ideas for such a transition) into a missional disposition in the world.”
Here are some things I hope your post on this transition will address:
Does the transition from the institutional to missional paradigm need to be wholesale in order for it to be authentic/legitimate? Are hybrid congregations possible, that have one foot in Christendom/programming and another in fostering incarnational communities that inhabit their neighborhoods?
In previous posts you’ve offered many insights into how this transition impacts a church’s liturgy and ministry focus. But can you describe how the transition to a missional paradigm takes root in the hearts and minds of those who have spent decades in Christendom? How do I open the imaginations of my congregants to see the need to move beyond the nostalgia?
Matt …WhOOahh … those are great and huge questions. I hope to learn a little about all this in the near future as week work with congeragtions and even our own in some of these issues.
There’s no simple comment that can address your questions – but I hope to continue in the learning and exploring of these issues on this blog. In the meantime …those further along than I out there .. feel free to comment!!
Thinking about revivalisms influence to local church worship-taking these sort of steps (backing away from an attractional way of doing church to a missional identity), how does our worship change?
I agree that these events still attract crowds because some folk still find them entertaining. In my local church I have been fighting battles because people still feel the need to do an easter program, when last year we only had 9 disciples. The attractional evangelical model simply doesn’t work.
I think the biggest change that will have to be made in the local church is for people to learn to not “think like Christians”, meaning what they find entertaining, enjoyable and spiritually profitable. You would be hard pressed to get a non-Christian to come to an old fashioned revival meeting, but if the church is hold a discussion group about the affects of “insert important topic” on the local church, you might get some people in church that wouldn’t otherwise come.
I think it is alright for us to have some nostalgia. I have it at times to…but I can separate it. Its all about context.
Great post, Dave. I’ve been wrestling with these issues for some time… and still wrestling.
Ditto on the great question from Matt J. A lot of people like Roxburgh are arguing for an overhaul of existing church structures and entities, from the local to denominational (as well as interdenominational networks and such). To even begin to work through that, we have to be able to answer Matt’s question of how to move people (that is, the millions of people in N. America who currently profess faith in Christ and are part of local communities of faith) into a more missional way of understanding, being, and doing church and ministry.
One of the big issues we are facing is a small, but growing, generation of missional leaders who, unless they are evangelistically gifted, are finding themselves without a context in which to lead. In any given community, the proportion of people willing and ready to follow a missional leader to people looking for more Christendom types of leadership (e.g., priest, pedagogue, professional) remains very small. So long as the missional conversation remains among a relatively small, insular group of academicians, pastors, and bloggers, we will not see the ‘missional renaissance’ we are hoping for. Despite the popularity of the term ‘missional,’ and the various attempts to define it in more mainstream Christian media (e.g., CT, LN), to most people it still remains either nebulous or simply a synonym for ‘externally focused.’
I believe it is going to take more than books, blogs, and informal, intimate relational networks to spread the vision. We need those, for sure, but engaging the larger population of existing ‘Christendom N. America’ needs to be high on our priority list. Macro-level strategic thinking is an urgent must.
Regards,
matt