{"id":15766,"date":"2018-01-09T22:32:08","date_gmt":"2018-01-10T06:32:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/?p=15766"},"modified":"2018-01-09T22:32:08","modified_gmt":"2018-01-10T06:32:08","slug":"how-not-to-be-religious","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/how-not-to-be-religious\/","title":{"rendered":"How (Not) to be Religious"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"mega_church\"<\/a><\/p>\n

On a recent trip to California, I went to a Christmas Eve service to a church boasting an impressive 15,000 members and growing. The multiple sites, large facilities, and talented staff were impressive. Sitting in the huge auditorium amongst a throng of people, the pastor’s greeting was confusing as he mentioned he didn’t appreciate the church is described as a mega church but rather a church with a mega vision. Similar to the mega-church not wanting to be considered mega, How (Not) to be Secular<\/em> reminded me of the tensions Christians face frequently in how to be spiritual but not religious, relational yet not legalistic, and large yet not mega. Just as we are unable to escape these tensions, Smith suggests we are unable to escape the secular impact on religion and our Christian beliefs.:”…no one, not even die-hard believers … can fully escape the feeling that maybe ‘this is all there is.’ This nagging doubt is captured by the parenthetical \u201cnot\u201d in the title.”[1]<\/a>\u00a0It is a dismal concept that we are plagued with inescapable doubt as we join the ranks of secularism doubting our fundamental Christian beliefs. “We don\u2019t believe instead of doubting; we believe while doubting. We\u2019re all Thomas now.”[2]<\/a><\/p>\n

I would argue that not all hold the secular belief question of “is this is all there is,” in reference to their faith but rather in reference to their church. When one has met a powerful God intimately, some believe the church is morally failing to offer an accurate portrayal of the image of Christ as reflected in the body of the church. As if to say when attending a church lacking in faith, unity, and spirit, “Is this all there is to who you describe Christ to be?” Is the church enacting its divine purpose to accomplish the calling and function to aid, heal, and befriend a secular world, and to be “in the world, but not of the world?”[3]<\/a> As a church we need to be introducing people to a powerful God who can change their lives and offer them the hope, healing, and love they are desperately seeking. As much as we try not to be secular or too religious, we are both and neither, creating the perpetual, unresolved haunting tension, that lurks in the ethos of our churches and crevices of our spiritual lives.<\/p>\n

I will compare two thoughts from this book to the tensions Christians experience in navigating secularism while attempting to hold onto their faith.<\/p>\n

Buffered self…<\/p>\n

To navigate these tensions, a protective response is to buffer oneself as Smith suggests. In doing so, we are not able to fully partake in the world around us, as we are operating in a protective, veiled posture from opposing thoughts and positions. This prevents one from fully experiencing<\/p>\n

life, and keeps one buffered from discomfort, but provides a space for opposing thoughts and opinions to dwell. “The buffering of the self from alien forces also carves out a space for a nascent privacy, and such privacy provides both protection and permission to disbelieve.”[4]<\/a><\/p>\n

Perhaps by providing open forums to discuss thoughts, ideas, doubts, and pose difficult questions might be a step forward in helping people not to have a buffered self in church, and to develop a community where people can be received in their authenticity. Open leadership can also cultivate and inspire a spirit of community with transparency as it “fosters new relationships.”[5]<\/a><\/p>\n

Immanent frame…<\/p>\n

“So the question isn’t whether we inhabit the immanent frame, but how.”[6]<\/a> How do we live in the life, culture, and age we reside in? Some can live in an open way or a closed way, or as Smith describes it, transcendence (open) or immanence (closed). The article Dr. Jason Clark posted on being open-minded or closed-minded complements this well. Open-minded people: are curious and ask questions instead of saying statements, change their mind, are humble in presenting their perspective, seek to listen and understand others, and integrate opposing thoughts.[7]<\/a> Sometimes it appears that we as Christians can fear to be open-minded to others out of a concern of being seduced by secularism and humanistic thinking, so we remain closed-minded and unrelenting, further isolating us from those we are called to reach. Could open-mindedness be a way to resolve the Christian tension to be “in the world but not of the world?” I consider my journey and see how much I have grown, changed my mind, and embraced different concepts that have grown my faith and relationships. Choosing to be open-minded as a Christian and a community seems to be a difficult challenge, as the fear of compromising doctrinal beliefs and retaining moral high-ground can often become the primary focus.<\/p>\n

Fostering an open-minded community without compromising doctrinal theology is a feat to accomplish and one I often see many American churches struggling to achieve. This challenge is often perpetuated as the open-minded individual is dismissed, labeled, or marginalized, thus cultivating a culture of closed-minded individuals that “smugly dismiss those who disagree.”[8]<\/a> Smith elaborates on closed systems as being “completely unsustainable for anyone with intellectual and existential honesty.”[9]<\/a> Maybe this explains why my conflictive childhood church in Palm Springs, California was torn down and replaced with condominiums. As we reach out to convert others to Christ, maybe we need to consider converting ourselves to be more open-minded.<\/p>\n

A great sequel for churches could be How (Not) to be a Mega Church<\/em>.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0[1]Matthew Claridge, “Review of James K.A. Smith, How (Not) to be Secular: Reading Charles Taylor”, December 8, 2014, Accessed January 6, 2018, http:\/\/www.booksataglance.com\/book-reviews\/review-of-james-ka-smith-how-not-to-be-secular-reading-charles-taylor\/.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [2] James K. A Smith, How (Not) to Be Secular: Reading Charles Taylor<\/em>, (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2014), Kindle, 194.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [3] John 15:19<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [4] Smith, How (Not) to Be Secular, <\/em>31.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [5] Charlene Li, Open Leadership: How Social Technology Can Transform the Way You Lead<\/em>, (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2010), Kindle, 469.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [6] Smith, How (Not) to Be Secular, <\/em>Kindle, 2057-60.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [7]<\/strong> Ray Dalio, “The Difference Between Open-Minded and Closed-Minded People,” Accessed December 17, 2017, https:\/\/www.farnamstreetblog.com\/2017\/09\/open-closed-minded.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [8] Smith, How (Not) to Be Secular, <\/em>Kindle, 2090-92.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [9] Ibid, Kindle, 2898-2900.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On a recent trip to California, I went to a Christmas Eve service to a church boasting an impressive 15,000 members and growing. The multiple sites, large facilities, and talented staff were impressive. Sitting in the huge auditorium amongst a throng of people, the pastor’s greeting was confusing as he mentioned he didn’t appreciate the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":86,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[833],"class_list":["post-15766","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-james-k-a-smith","cohort-lgp7"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15766","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/86"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15766"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15766\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15767,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15766\/revisions\/15767"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15766"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15766"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15766"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}