Relevance

At a church meeting today, someone gave a very stern warning that we have to be careful about not focusing on becoming a “relevant” church because there are all kinds of “relevant” churches out there that aren’t making a difference. (Though I wonder what kind of church he’s comparing them to, because I’m not convinced that our non-’relevant’ church is really making that big of a splash.)

Something about that statement struck me as having a partial truth, yet for me it somewhat helped underscore the tragedy of the world-view and attitudes that are rampant throughout Western Christianity.

The statement seemed to infer that so-called relevant churches are either offering a false Gospel, or at least a watered-down, ineffective one. To be sure, there definitely are churches that present a Gospel that is much less than the call for life transformation and total allegiance that Jesus and the early church presented. I share the concern for depth of commitment and solid biblical foundation.

I don’t, however, think that those churches set out to be shallow. Most people who start ministries do so with the desire to honor God and to connect people with him. They use tactics that bring in the people, yet many - if not most - churches, ‘relevant’ or not, have a very poor approach toward discipleship.

I guess the issue comes down to what or what is not relevant.

Somewhere along the line, the American church got this idea that to be relevant we have to make everything easily palatable for our target audience and we have to sacrifice our ‘sacred’ gatherings for pop-culture-laden, big-production, rock-star led events, complete with laser light shows to wow the masses.

So, when people hear the term relevant in that context, it elicits a wide range of responses, from a warm welcome by church people who are bored with their church-going experience, to a cold rejection by those who think culture is the enemy of the church.

Honestly, church services that are relevant, or seeker-friendly are generally not reaching unchurched people. Nor are churches who hold onto traditional forms of worship and church services. Relevance, as understood in the church, has a lot more to do with style than it does with interacting with and transforming culture.

People from both camps genuinely want to experience God. Both camps tend to think their style is better. Neither camp, in my opinion, is effectively transforming people and culture.

I thought it might be helpful just to get out a dictionary and look up the word relevant. It means closely connected or appropriate to the matter at hand. Wow. Using that definition, I want every part of who I am and my ministry to be relevant.

Maybe our attitude toward relevance needs to change, because I do believe that the Gospel is very relevant, and that God is very relevant to people of every time, culture, and world-view. The good news is for humankind, and if we are going to relate that good news to humankind, we have to be willing to interact with people and share our lives with them - every nook and cranny.

It’s not supposed to be a ‘sacred vs. secular’ battle. Paul, when in Athens, referenced poets - not Christian poets, pagan poets. He looked for areas in the culture where people were genuinely searching for meaning - for God. He used that as an avenue to communicate about the kingdom of God. He wasn’t concerned about whether or not he was being too worldly. He was concerned about helping people connect with God, in a relevant way.

Real relevance is not an attempt to make the Gospel easy. It is not about a style of worship or short messages interspersed with video clips. It is about being closely connected with God and his mission, and understanding and knowing the people with whom we are sharing Jesus and his kingdom. It is about embodying kingdom values and transformation, and extending it into the lives of those around us. It’s about removing whatever barriers we can so that we can engage with people, and they can engage with God. It’s about being selfless in regards to our style preferences because God’s heart and his mission are much more important than hymnals, pews, lighting, and PowerPoint.

We also must speak in terms people understand. I like technology and media, and I do think they have their place in the church because it’s a language of people today. However, there are other more powerful ‘voices’ that people understand. People understand authenticity. They understand being cared for. People grasp spiritual truths best when they are connected with people who are seeking to live out those truths. That is relevant. That is what we are called to be.