He was conspicuously non-political during the 60s. He could have advocated for racial justice, but he did not.
I was just talking this morning to a workmate about her experience with a non-denominational church. The problem with those churches, generally, is that the pastor is primarily an entrepreneur. They act that way, they have the goals and methods of an entrepreneur. They're not doing it right. They need to be men or women of God first. Here's the thing. Most people are either morally lazy or out and out assholes. So if you run a megachurch, by definition, you're offering something that appeals to shitty people. Your message isn't challenging shitty people. So you're not promulgating Jesus' message.
As you know, I'm not a believer, but whatever militancy my atheism once manifested has long ago burned out. I've been thinking about the specific problems with American evangelicalism, and I think a big part of it is the rise of 'non-denominational' mega-churches and whatnot. I like your observation that they are primarily run by entrepreneurs. That's spot-on. I do think the decline of traditional, moderate denominations is in many ways part and parcel with the rise of populist anti-institutionalism we're dealing with right now. The congregation I grew up in--a small UCC church that took over from an older "Federated" Congregationalist church in my Nebraska home town--is dying out. My parents, and many of the adults I remember growing up, are just about all that's left. Unless they grew up in the church and didn't move away, younger people (and I'm talking middle-aged people, at this point) don't belong to the church, don't join it. During a recent bout of really cold weather, they decided to hold service in the meeting room next to the actual congregation area, as it would have been too expensive to heat the entire church. Which means no choir, no organ, no piano. There's only a small group of mostly older, retired members left. Their brand of mainstream, moderately liberal Christianity grounded in specific theology and practice, just doesn't attract new members in that small town.
Billy Graham and his ilk are largely to blame for that. Half the people have abandoned religion altogether and the other half are fundamentalist morons; there's just not a lot of room left for the folks who used to go to that church.
WiIdly OT, but I've been thinking a lot about this problem off and on for several years now. (I'm still waiting for @Dr. Wankler to write "Ostentatious Christianity and the Republican Party." Look, dude, I came up with the title and the topic. All I'm asking you to do is write a several hundred page book.) I see 2 key problems for mainline Protestantism. 1. It has failed to grapple with modern astrophysics. There's no theology incorporating what the average person under age, say, 50, understands about the universe. We punt on that issue. Each individual who grew up in a mainline Protestant church is left on his or her own to come up with a theology that still works. Obviously far, far too many of them either go the agnostic/atheist rout, or completely punt on the question and go to fundamentalism. (Which, to clarify, is NOT the same thing as evangelicalism.) Or they just pretend it's not a problem and lose kids once they take high school science classes. (This is more of a problem for boys than girls. Which leads me to....) 2. Modern mainline Protestantism is vastly more appealing to women than men. I have a theory about that. Maybe it's nuts, but it's my theory. Excuse the stereotyping, but it appeals to women because of the social/belonging aspect. Men, especially when they're young and chock full of testosterone, want to fight. They want something to battle against. And we offer them...nothing, really. Someone out there needs to start a mainstream conversation about modern science and theology. I went to see Emily Russell speak and read one of her books, and it's...not mainstream. I'm a smart ************************, and I'm interested in what she's trying to do, and my first read of her book was beyond me. Second, mainline Protestants have to, with agape love, challenge the rampant heresies in entrepreneurial megachurches. We can't merely pump up our beliefs. In order to appeal to men, and just make American Christianity better, we need to relentlessly and with scripture call bullshit on the lukewarm. Make it a battle.
... The "Pastor as entrepreneur" scenario makes sense, because that's what he's doing, especially if he has no financial backing. But how does it necessarily follow that the people seeking such a church are morally lazy for not just joining a church within an established, larger organization? Are they lazy if they see flaws in/have issues with the larger organizations that make them decide to go non-denom? Does this apply only to Christianity, or is it extended to all churches outside any aegis? I'm going to set the not promulgating Jesus' message aside for the moment, because Christianity requires that or there'd be no point in its name. But are you implying that the established denominations we have now should be sufficient for anyone who might want someplace or something to worship (and therefore, all who seek anything else are lazy)? It's a big country- there are almost surely non-denominationals that are not Christian. Is their membership morally lazy? Oh, and let the record show that not all Christian organizations are moral self-starters. I'm looking at the Southern Baptist Convention first and foremost. Compare the SBC to the National Baptist Convention and you'll see their shortcomings right away. But both believe they're promulgating Jesus' message. I'm sure there are plenty of women who see the Roman Catholic Church as morally lazy for not allowing women to become priests. Moral laziness can occur within the boundaries or an established church.
I might be wrong, because I am no churchgoer, but it seems to me that my grandparents (middle-church mainstream Protestants) were told in church that they were sinners, and that today's churches tell their attendees that they are OK, but that other people are sinners. At least, that is what a lot of the churchgoing types seem to believe.
I'll get started on the book ASAP. I'll give Billy Graham credit for one thing. I once heard him talk about how, during the Nixon administration, he became pretty rabidly, and defensively partisan for Nixon, acting as the de facto chaplain for the Executive Branch. Later, he acknowledged his mistake, admitting that he let Nixon use him for political cover, while he used Nixon to gain status in the culture. Hi 'fessed up to hubris, greed, and a few other of the big ones. Alas, his son doesn't appear to have learned that lesson yet. Who's Emily Russell? I went to Amazon, and I get a 20 something self-published author of what appears to be Jane Austen fan-fiction. There are some Catholics, many of them nuns, actually working on this, mostly working out of the tradition of Tielhard de Chardin, but not exclusively. Ilia DeLio's Making All Things New: Catholicity, Cosmology, and Consciousness was pretty good and accessible. She has an earlier book I haven't read called The Unbearable Wholeness of Being: God, Evolution, and the Power of Love. Here's a short interview with her I haven't read. http://www.omegacenter.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/interview_with_ilia_delio_-_op_summer_12.pdf There was a priest named Thomas Berry who also worked in cosmology and ecology. He collaborated with a guy named Brian Swimme to write The Universe Story, which is pretty good for what you're talking about. Alas, because there isn't a big mainline market for such a book, it is marketed more toward the woo-woo "I'm spiritual not religious" types than anyone who is interested in community. There are a few others, but I have to teach a three hour class tonight and as of right now I only have about 45 minutes of material.
Good point. Let me try to explain what I was trying to say better. First, let's separate non-denominationals with medium sized congregations from those with large or mega-sized congregations. I'm talking about the latter. Your point is valid for the former...but does such an animal exist in the wild? Second, let me use music to make my point. Kenny G is a jazz artist. At his peak he sold a huge number of records, played in large venues. Because his jazz is easy to listen to. It doesn't stand the test of time, it doesn't impact its listeners' lives, but it never meant to. I'm not going to embarrass myself by naming names, but there are jazz artists who are the opposite of Kenny G, who make uncompromising music. A minister who puts entrepreneurialism at the front is like Kenny G. His aim is to be theological elevator jazz. His aim is to attract the theologically and morally lazy, because that's the biggest audience. I hope that makes it clearer. To me, a minister who aims to build a megachurch by definition is going to avoid challenging his congregation at all costs. How can you be mega if you challenge the lazy? An interesting question, one I have no idea how to answer. Let me answer that in a bit of a roundabout way. The rise of consumer culture (******** boomers, again) has led to a selfishness and self-centeredness in Americans. Easy religion is perfect for such a consumer culture. Many church-goers put themselves at the center of their faith. That's ********ed up. Dare I say heretical? I may have the name wrong. I'll double check the book I have and post it tonight. Terrific point. Mainline Protestantism lapses into this quite often. Well, if that's your target audience, your target audience is going to read the "right" books and donate time and money to the "right" causes and sleep in on Sunday mornings.
That's the biggest beef I have with my current church. I guess you could call it a "mega church," at least by New England standards. There are about 3,000 members spread over 5 campuses. I believe the pastoral staff are sincere, and in it for the right reasons (in fact probably the biggest drawback is the lack of "business skills"). Nonetheless, the head pastor has to tread lightly on topics and can't say anything too "controversial" for fear of offending people. Last November, he got a lot of flack for suggesting that people vote based on which candidate(s) line up most closely with their own views on various issues, balanced with their competence and their character. About the most delicate way you can phrase something like that but some single-issue Trumpanzees got offended. Another problem is the lack of volunteers for various church functions, and the fact that they don't like to do more than ask politely like a Canadian when it comes to getting people to do stuff. Don't want to tell people that, if they want to be a member, they are expected to contribute either with their time or financially, otherwise they are just parasites, only looking for what they can get.
Well raised Catholic and yes, we're all sinners. And confession is supposed to wipe the slate clean to some extent. But I always felt Big Church was watching you anyway. Evangelicals forgive any old thang, including Trump. So it's totally alien to Catholics IMO.
It's just a smart move these days, for any man. I recommend that any male teacher or manager have an adult female present anytime they have to address a female student or subordinate. The door should never, ever be closed. The one time I was asked to drive some HS girls home after a school event, I told them that I would drop them all off at the home of their choice and it would be the parents' job to take the the rest of the way. That spared me the risk of being alone in my car with any one of them. These were respectable, well-behaved girls, but in this day/age, no chances can be taken. Plenty of parents do everything right and still have one of their kids become a crackhead or engage in some other criminal activity. If there's a Paradise worth occupying, Pete will deny Franklin entry on his own (lack of) merit.
Heidi Russell, not Emily. https://books.google.com/books/abou...BAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button
I get why this has become the defacto standard, particularly in teacher/student relationships, but it just strikes me as totally weird to be afraid to be in the same room with a professional colleague who happens to be female. I work in marketing, which is a field with a large female presence, so it's not unusual for me to have one-on-one meetings with female colleagues. The thought never crosses anyone's mind to drag others into a meeting just because someone is afraid that somebody is going to act inappropriately (or accuse someone else of doing it). Bottom line is if you act like a decent human being at all times, there is no reason to go all Mike Pence on it. I mean the guy is so far into the closet, he's found next year's Christmas presents, yet, he won't treat a female colleague with the same respect he would a male one.
I almost completely agree with what you're saying. A megachurch pastor is going to counter all of this with the idea that they are trying to make teachings and scripture accessible. Their mission is to bring people to the faith, even if others argue the message and the notion of faith is degraded as part of this compromise. The end result is that the church feels like a more secular self help book for everyday tangible things than a set of spiritual principles and teachings. The modern consumer culture you hit on is the driving force, IMO. Megachurches have economies of scale that allow them to cater to groups within groups in congregations. Daytime or evening bible study? Pick from one of 20 different course, based upon your availability and the subject matter. Sunday service? Three services at the main campus, two at any of the 7 satellite locations. Can't make it because of Timmy's soccer game? Watch online, either live, or on demand. New to the area as a transplant? We literally have 300 members who have joined in the past year who are also transplants. You'll end up hanging out with them as part of a "church within a church" anyway. Megachurches are choose your own adventure self help books. Congregants pick from the menu and determine who they hang out with, what messages they want to receive, what activities they want to partake in at scheduled times that are tailored to their "special" lifestyles.