An entire movement toward being “relevant” is running amok throughout American churches. Once a useful adjective, this word has become the idyllic Holy Grail for churches craving the cool factor. – Gabe Lyons, The Next Christians
Can we become too relevant?
It may depend on your definition. For some Christians, it may be what they consider to be trendy, hoping that others will see their church as being “cool” or “different.” The idea is consciously or subconsciously, “if we can just make our church cool, everyone will want to join in.” For others, it’s simply trying to communicate or adapt the gospel message in a way that people can relate to.
Seems harmless, but may I suggest that by mimicking cultural tendencies, we are only making the church a trend follower and not a trend setter. Gabe Lyons explains it like this, “It’s a catch-up mentality. The pursuers end up in second, third, or fourth place, striving to be in the lead, but never quite get there. It’s proving to be a misguided premise.”
Culture does not provide accurate solutions for those who desire truth concerning grace, purpose, and meaning. Perhaps by trying to build a bridge to culture through relevance, we are only ignoring the true cravings of people. While we must be engaged in culture, as Mark Driscoll points out in a recent post here, we are also to reject some aspects of our culture and redeem the things that are not evil in and of themselves. In other words, embrace culture with the purpose of being able to recognize how your community should respond appropriately and faithfully. Maybe instead of trying to accomplish relevance, the church should be offering an alternative way of living that is counter to their culture.
I suggest the church becomes too relevant when it becomes more about fitting in with culture and less about becoming countercultural. I'm certainly not implying that we become more known for what we are against than what we are for. I think we need to become better at lighting candles than we are at cursing darkness. I just wonder if our faith communities need to be less about relevance and more about how to live counter to culture.
Culture doesn’t reveal that we’re actually blessed when we’re insulted, persecuted, and lied about. Culture doesn’t tell us to be glad when we’re mistreated. Didn’t Jesus basically say, culture says to hate your enemies, but I tell you to love them; culture says eye for an eye, but I say turn the other cheek; culture says don’t kill, but I say don’t even be angry toward another brother?
Our American culture tells us to chase after wealth, comfort, power, success, and complete happiness. These things aren't necessarily bad, but the values and commands of Jesus are different.
How is this counterculture message communicated?
It’s so cliché, the message stays the same, but the methods change. Well, then what determines when or how the methods change?
Here’s how Paul explains it in 1 Corinthians 9:22-23, “I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel.” Later in 1 Corinthians 10:33 he says, “even as I try to please everybody in every way…I am not seeking my own good but the good of many so that they may be saved.”
Paul was a missionary to culture. Wherever he went he preached the gospel and did it in such a way that Christ was glorified. When he was with Jews, he lived like a Jew. When he was with Gentiles, he lived like a Gentile. When he was with those of weaker faith, he was conscious of that fact. He embraced each broken and fallen culture all while not compromising who he was in Christ and by offering an alternative way of living that stood out.
His methods depended on three things…
- His Mission – Paul did what he did “for the sake of the gospel” and “so that they may be saved.” That was his mission. What he was doing determined how he was going to accomplish it. We need to first determine our mission before we start figuring out how we can going to achieve it.
- His Context – Paul’s ultimate message didn’t change, but what did change was the context of who he presented it to. Corinth was a town highly influenced by Greek culture, so Paul saw it appropriate to use Greek philosophy in his messages because people were interested. He used their cultural interests by not shunning them, but by using them as a catalyst to offer counterculture solutions. In Galatia, he needed to contextualize his message to address the bondages of legalism that were being placed on Gentiles. Paul’s method of communication was to simply deconstruct the false teachings of the Judaizers and then to reconstruct the message of the gospel – It is by grace through faith alone that man is justified. By listening to the influences of his context, Paul was able to offer biblical solutions. Similarly, when we put our ears to our city and truly listen to its questions and concerns, we can provide biblical solutions.
- His Style – I don’t know this for sure, but I’m guessing Paul didn’t sit around too much thinking, “If I could just preach more like Barnabas, Peter, or Silas, I would have a more relevant ministry.” In addition, I seriously doubt he wished he could write as eloquently as James or had as many Twitter followers as Timothy. Paul appeared to be pretty confident in who he was and who he wasn’t. Relevance takes on an unhealthy precedence when we try to become someone we are not. If it’s not you to show movie clips when you teach, then don’t. If it's not you to wear skinny jeans and v-necks, then for the love of God...don't. If you’re a leader who feels pressure to be the life of the party, but you’re not wired to do so, then don’t. If you’re not funny, don’t try to be.
I recently read a great post by Pete Wilson where he talks about the importance of knowing who you’re not. He writes, “I think it’s painfullly obvious that way too many Christian (leaders) are attempting to live a life that is not true to who they are.” I can definitely relate to that. Read the whole post here. When we get to Heaven, God’s not going to ask, “why weren’t you more like Andy Stanley, Rob Bell, or Francis Chan?” He may ask though, “why weren’t you more like you?”
Being too relevant is when it becomes more important than being true to your mission, context, and style. What is your mission? What is your culture telling you? How can you help offer Biblical solutions?
Posts
