1. Contrary to what's shown on TV, 99.8% of Hollywood is not glamorous, star studded or beautiful at all.
2. Drugs, sex, prostitution and poverty are rampant in Hollywood. It is one of the most spiritually broken cities I've ever been in.
3. The Church has little to no presence there.
That being said, this weekend, I noticed the Church's presence there in a striking way. Driving down Hollywood Blvd., I stumbled upon a big black sign that said in white letters, 'Ecclesia.' Curious, I pulled over to see it closer. The church was meeting in an old, broken down theater (fitting, eh?). Literally, right next door to the theater was a sex shoppe (the little pink building to the left in the photo).
I did a bit of searching around online about their Church, and in general, they were Evangelical! Of course, they were super-hip, all with cool hair, cool clothes, and a love for Indy music. In short, the staff looked like they belonged in Hollywood. They were contextualizing their message ( like missionaries dressing in African garb, they too were dressed in Hollywood garb). An Evangelical presence on Hollywood Blvd.?! I loved the picture: A church proclaiming the Lordship of Christ, right next to a sex shoppe! Isn't this how Christ ministered when He was here in the flesh? Isn't this how He still ministers today: in the midst of tax collectors and sinners (even eating with them!)?
On the other hand, a couple blocks away, I saw a different kind of Church entirely. Oh, they claimed to be Christians, and their building (at first glance) certainly gave testimony to that effect. Towering over the other buildings around it, the old Methodist Church looked much more like a traditional church building then say a theater next to a sex shoppe. Yet, as I got closer to the building, it became very clear that they were anything but traditional. I saw three big banners hanging from their windows and doors. They read:
1. "Reclaiming the Bible for Progressive Christians"
2. "We are different. We believe in Equality."
3. Sermon this Sunday: 'Marriage Equality.'
What struck me was how both Churches were trying to reach their culture. The Evangelical Church changed their dress, music style, and overall aesthetics, yet maintained the central message of Christianity. The Methodist Church, on the other hand, in order to reach the culture, did not give up it's dress, music style, and overall aesthetics, but in order to "be relevant" seems to have given up it's message.
So here's the thoughts I came away with:
1. Contextualization has it's limits. The message cannot be changed. Ever. We cannot tamper with it. The Gospel must remain central. The Methodist Church looks the part, but like so many Church buildings, appears to be full of dead men's bones. Style changes, music changes, what's considered beautiful, or fashionable today, can very quickly look old and antiquated not too much further into the future.
2. Although, I can't be sure of this, I have a pretty strong sense that this particular Methodist church wasn't always the way it is today. I'm sure at one time, even if they were "more progressive," someone once preached the Gospel there. But over time, in a quest to "be relevant" to their culture, they just began to affirm the culture, rather than confront it with Christ's claims. Evangelicalism in some ways, is in danger of heading down this same road. Endless self-help sermons, five step programs, and hipper than thou Pastors all can make for a very shallow Church.
3. What then is the key to staying safe? Contextualizing your message, without losing your message? I think it's found in this tension: 1 Corinthians 9:22- "I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some." 1 Corinthians 4:6- "Do not go beyond what is written."
May God help us maintain this tension by the Holy Spirit's working in us and through us.
1 comments:
Enjoyed this piece Erick. You are absolutely right that there is a danger in "over-contextualizing." Go too far to the right (i.e. no contextualization), and the truth of Scripture ends up running roughshod over culture. You get a kind of insensitive triumphalism that sees no good at all in the culture (tabula rasa), and is unable to see God's fingerprints in it (redemptive analogies). But if you go too far to the left (over-contextualization), you end up with culture trumping the biblical message--culture becomes the supreme authority over all things, and there is no recognition that the culture needs transformation.
Another way I've heard this talked about is in terms of "faithfulness to the Word" and "relevancy." Both are needed for effective ministry. If you have only faithfulness to the Word, and are not relevant, you may indeed be speaking biblical truth, but your audience can't "hear" you; thus, there is no understanding of the Gospel of message. On the other hand, if you are "relevant" to the culture, but are not faithful to the biblical message, you may indeed be "heard" but the message won't transform. Law and Gospel are not being preached properly, so there is no knowledge of sin, and no understanding of the Gospel. Both faithfulness to the Word and relevancy to the audience are needed for effective service in God's mission. This is a bit of an oversimplification, of course, since you can be both faithful and relevant and still see the Gospel rejected, but then the stumbling block is the cross, not the messenger. (Gaylan Mathiesen)
Post a Comment