In my last commentary the church and how its common life together is essential to being the church versus simply doing church. At its most practical level, this life together affords greater protection from sin "that so easily entangles," along with remedy and restoration when it does. Unfortunately, this depth of communal life and accountability in the American church has suffered serious loss over the course of the last century.

The fact is, as Americans living in a modern, technologically advanced society, we are simply less dependent on one another. Gone are the days when communities of every type had no choice but to depend on each other for assistance and protection—often for their very survival. For most of human history up until the last century, human survival was by no means a secure proposition. There were myriad risks and realities imminently capable of cutting one's life short (and they frequently did so); historically the human community served an essential role in combating these challenges. As technology and science progressed, age-old risks diminished and people naturally became more self-sufficient. While the lessening of life-threatening risks is indeed a good thing, one unintended consequence was the diminution of real human community—and this reality would ultimately come to affect the modern church.

This newfound independence on the part of human beings would prove essential to the emergence of radicalized individualism; a notion conceived during the Enlightenment and today a trademark of American culture.

Ironically, the rise of individualism owes its existence, in large part, to the Christian worldview in which humanity has both general and particular value in the sight of God. Being made in the image of God, humanity is the pinnacle of God's creation; being imbued with an individual soul and distinct personality, we are individually and wonderfully unique. God values the individual; thus an individualism that recognizes the distinctiveness and value of each person (without severing man's dependence upon God and obligation to others) is healthy. In essence, it is the concept of the one and the many—the individual is to be valued, but not above another.

Unfortunately, Enlightenment thinkers—with their emphasis on the autonomous self—exalted, practically speaking, the individual to a "one against the many" or an "every man for himself" mode of thinking. As to its effect upon our own times, David Wells writes, "The result is a radicalized individualism whose outlook is deeply privatized and whose mood is insistently therapeutic" (Above All Earthly Powers: Christ in a Postmodern World, [Grand Rapids, MI: Wm B. Eerdmanns, 2005], p 138). These two elements—faith that is privatized and therapeutic—feature prominently in the American church today. Catholic writer Anthony Gittins would describe the privatizing effect on the Christian faith as "a belief that religion is a private affair between individual and God; that each person has all the knowledge (gnosis, hence gnosticsm) needed; and that no one has any business interfering with the way an individual chooses to live" (Anthony J. Gittins, A Presence That Disturbs: A Call to Radical Discipleship, [Ligouri, MO: Ligouri Publications, 2002], p. 5).

Clearly, if we believe that "no one has any business interfering" in the way we live, we are disinclined to pursue (much less achieve) authentic Christian community. True Christian fellowship demands that, at the very least, we balance and, when necessary, surrender our individualism in the interest of others as indicated in Philippians 2:3-4 (NIV):

Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.

As to the interests of others, I have previously argued that we, as a community, have both an interest and responsibility to prepare, promote, and preserve every marriage within the body. There are many factors that contribute to the demise of marriages within the church, but there is one in particular whose virulence and force is made worse by our isolation and indifference to community: pοrnography! This sin grows in its influence and effect through secrecy and there is perhaps no greater secret sin in the church than the habitual consumption of pοrnography.

In March 2005, Christianity Today published the results of a study in which 680 pastors were surveyed. Fifty-seven percent said that addiction to pοrnography is the most sexually damaging issue to their congregations. According to a Focus on the Family poll from October 2003, 47.78 percent of families said pοrnography is a problem in their home. In March 2002, Pastors.com conducted a survey of 1351 pastors: 54 percent had viewed Internet pοrnography within the last year, and 30 percent of these had visited within the last thirty days. In 2007, Shelley Lubben of Shelley Lubben Ministries was speaking at a men's conference before 2,000 men. She challenged those who were struggling with porn addiction to stand. Thirty percent rose to their feet. She immediately challenged them a second time, with the result being, some 70 percent were standing. There are countless examples of similar anecdotal evidence available from numerous ministries, including my own, which indicate that pοrnography is a plaguing and largely unspoken problem within the church.

Having studied the impact and effects of pοrnography for nearly nine years now, I can say that I have never seen a more degenerative nor destructive sin behavior than the habitual consumption of pοrnography. I have seen men (and, increasingly, women) whose lives (families and children) have been utterly destroyed. In almost every instance, they began with material that—relatively speaking—was mild, only to later find themselves viewing material or acting out in ways previously inconceivable. Given the unprecedented access and anonymity afforded by the Internet, pοrnography has become one of Satan's greatest and most malevolent tools in his mission to kill, steal, and destroy.

Those who are in the grip of prnography often suffer silently, hoping against hope that they can manage to overcome its power through their own efforts. They are naturally reluctant to confess and seek help from another due to the overstated stigma of sexual sin. Sin is sin and these brothers (and sisters) need a community of love and support who understand our universal inclination to sin and know themselves enough to say "there but for the grace of God go I." We must turn our attack from the sinner to the sin and overcome this evil within the body with the love of Christ. There is a war raging in the church and we together must take up arms in its defense, being vigilant to guard against sin and vigorous in the rescue of sinners.

© 2009 by S. Michael Craven

Respond to this article here

Subscribe to Michael's weekly commentary here

Subscribe to Michael's podcast here

---

S. Michael Craven is the President of the Center for Christ & Culture and the author of Uncompromised Faith: Overcoming Our Culturalized Christianity (Navpress, 2009). Michael's ministry is dedicated to equipping the church to engage the culture with the redemptive mission of Christ. For more information on the Center for Christ & Culture and the teaching ministry of S. Michael Craven, visit: www.battlefortruth.org

 

In a recent Newsweek magazine article entitled, "Marriage Is Hard: The religious right admits it" (Oct. 19, 2009), writer Lisa Miller begins by drawing a contrast between the convictions and conduct of two professing Christians: Billy Graham and Senator John Ensign (R-NV). In describing the Reverend Billy Graham she writes:

Billy Graham had a rule. He was a powerful man, away from his wife and children more often than he was with them. Aware of the significance of his reputation and convinced of the moral value of the Gospel message, he took precautions to guard against his own human weakness. He gave his ministry colleagues explicit instructions: never leave me alone in a room with a woman who is not my wife.

By contrast, Senator Ensign admitted to an extramarital affair with a campaign staffer and wife of a top aide in his office this past June. Of Senator Ensign, Miller writes: 

If only someone had given John Ensign similar advice. Or if someone did, that he'd heeded it. The Ensign story continues to reverberate not because of its delicious best-friend's-girl plotline (for who among us is surprised anymore that politicians sleep around?), but because he said he stood for something else. He is a "family values" Republican who voted for the impeachment of Bill Clinton and in 2004 lent his support to a constitutional amendment defining marriage, saying, "Marriage is an extremely important institution in this country, and protecting it is, in my mind, worth the extraordinary step of amending our Constitution." 

It isn't my intention to vilify Senator Ensign or pile on to man who is suffering the effects of his own sin. I am truly sad for him and his family. We all suffer from the destruction of a single family and Miller adds a painfully obvious point by saying, "Ensign has become the latest example of what so many see as the failure of the right to retain any credibility on the marriage question." 

However, as Christians our foremost concern is not the political right or left but the Christian church that is called to bear testimony to the lordship of Jesus Christ. This is why marriage both as an ideal and in reality should matter to the church, because its condition within the body of Christ either serves or opposes the gospel of the kingdom. We are simply called and empowered to live according to a higher standard—lives that should bear witness to a people who have been changed by God.

Of course the world has every right to expect this, especially when we assume the authority to speak on any moral issue. Ms. Miller echoes this expectation specific to marriage when she writes, "Of course, every person who utters ‘till death do us part' and then separates is, in a sense, conceding defeat. But when evangelicals are leading the charge in the marriage movement (and now, the anti-gay-marriage movement) arguing that sacred unions between one man and one woman are good for society because they're good for children, one would hope that they'd have worked out the kinks a little better than the rest of us."

Again, secular Newsweek magazine makes the ugly but all-too-apparent point, "No one denies that conservative Christians have a marriage problem, a dizzying gap between their articulated ideals and their success in achieving them." Miller points out that "according to the Pew Forum, evangelicals are more likely to be divorced than Roman Catholics, Mormons, the Eastern Orthodox, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and atheists." Linda Malone-Colon, Ph.D., a conservative advocate of marriage and director of the National Center on African American Marriages and Parenting gets straight to the point by saying, "It's as true with Christians as it is with other religious groups. They don't live by what they're talking about." Ouch!

Returning to our contrast between Billy Graham and John Ensign, one must ask, "What was the difference?" The immediate response might be, "Well, of course, Billy Graham is simply the better Christian." But Billy Graham, as wonderful as he is, isn't the recipient of more particular grace than anyone else. Granted, Billy Graham likely understood something about himself that Mr. Ensign did not, namely his own sin nature. Rev. Graham didn't think he was above temptation; he placed no confidence in the flesh. Quite the contrary, he didn't trust in himself at all, which is why he took the added precaution of asking others to help protect him—not from seductive women—but from himself. Billy Graham was perhaps wiser than Mr. Ensign, but he wasn't supernaturally immune to temptation.

More importantly, the Reverend Billy Graham understands the value of the larger Christian community and its rightful relationship to his life. At the very least, we are far more vulnerable to sin and destruction when independent and isolated than we are under the care (and accountability) of a loving community. Further, the Christian life is not an event in which we compete for the "individual gold medal" but a corporate life in which we seek the spiritual growth and restoration of the whole community. This is not happening on the scale that it should within the American church. Too many Christians remain individualized, isolated, alienated—and subsequently the church fails to flourish in its mission and purpose. My days are frequently filled counseling those who have found no support within their churches.

Furthermore, this "life together," as Dietrich Bonhoeffer argued, is not about "good experiences," but rather concerns real relations as we abide together in Christ—who is and who becomes present in the life of the body. Neither is this life together to be confused with a romantic sense of community, nor is it to be exclusively self-serving. The Christian community exists in Christ for the sake of the world, and when this common life together is not seen, both the church and the world suffer. It is the difference between actually being the church and simply doing church. Life in the body involves loving, sustaining, and supporting one another, in practice and in prayer, through the vicissitudes of life.

Because we all too often fail to foster the relationships essential to true Christian community, we cannot abide together in Christ. Consequently, we remain relatively indifferent to both sin and sinner in the church. We are reluctant to confront when necessary, seeking to arrest sin's destructive effect and restore the sinner. The result? Sin reigns within the church; marriages unravel and families are destroyed and the body of Christ looks no different from the world.

It is not enough to respond to the marriage crisis within the church by saying, "My marriage is fine!" If we abide together in Christ, then we together must prepare and care for marriage generally, and intervene specifically when any marriage is endangered. Practically this means we become more transparent in our struggles; we ask for help! It means we seek to restore sinners and thus we stop "shooting the wounded" when they share their weakness. Finally, we must engage in the spiritual warfare of which Paul speaks in Ephesians 6:10-18, setting captives free, fighting against the sin (not the sinner) that destroys, divides, and weakens the body.

In conclusion, we must take seriously our life together in Christ, bringing the abiding love of Christ to bear on each other and stop ceding the body's matrimonial and familial ground to the enemy.

© 2009 by S. Michael Craven

Respond to this article here

Subscribe to Michael's weekly commentary here

Subscribe to Michael's podcast here

---

S. Michael Craven is the President of the Center for Christ & Culture and the author of Uncompromised Faith: Overcoming Our Culturalized Christianity (Navpress, 2009). Michael's ministry is dedicated to equipping the church to engage the culture with the redemptive mission of Christ. For more information on the Center for Christ & Culture and the teaching ministry of S. Michael Craven, visit: www.battlefortruth.org

 

 

It has become all too easy for Christians to fall into a state of pessimism—even despair—over the state of our culture today. This is in some way understandable in light of the last fifty years. The once Christian character of the nation seems to have all but disappeared. While Christianity remains a visible presence in American life, clearly its influence on the culture is negligible.

Large segments of the church have become apathetic, conformed to the culture, or completely at odds with historic orthodox Christianity. While most Americans describe themselves as Christian in some way (77 percent), closer examination indicates that this is grossly overstated in terms of representing historic orthodox Christianity. Many simply describe themselves as Christians because they happened to be born into that tradition or they aren't consciously and admittedly atheist.

Despite the widespread veneer of religiosity (or spirituality), religion in general and Christianity in particular finds itself increasingly shut out from the public square, stripped of any real social and cultural significance. Christianity remains tolerated (for now) but the course of our society no longer finds itself under the guidance of serious Christian thought. And the evidence for this abounds in everything from widespread moral decay, changing values relative to human life and dignity, to the rise of Orwellian scientific ventures, and shifting economic and political theories. In short, there is scant evidence indicating that we are headed toward a better future; our historic social, economic, and spiritual gains are suffering a sharp reversal.

So is it easy to despair? Sure. Is there reason to hope that anything will change? Can the tide of immorality, paganism, and general debauchery that threatens to swamp us even be arrested, much less reversed? Can the moral character of the nation—once rooted in a vigorous Christian faith—be recovered? I believe history offers numerous examples where God, in his providence, has done so—and clearly this goal would be in keeping with God's character. The record of Israel throughout the Old Testament testifies to this cyclical pattern of blessing and prosperity followed by unfaithfulness, which led to spiritual and sometimes real captivity, only to be repeated once the nation repented.

More recently a notable rescue of the church and the nation took place in Great Britain during the latter days of the eighteenth century. This might surprise you. Eighteenth-century England was pagan, debauched, and ungodly? Yes!

There is a tendency to think in linear terms relative to the course of history and the church. In other words, we assume that things were once good, especially in America. But there has been a continuous and gradual descent to a lower condition. To be sure, many things were probably better in some ways in the past, but some things were also worse, and the complex course of redemptive history defies such simple and categorical explanation.  History confirms the more cyclical pattern indicated above, in which we see both the blessings and judgments of God poured out on the nations.

My good friend Eric Metaxas underscores this very point, relative to an overly romanticized view of eighteenth-century England, in his outstanding biography of William Wilberforce, Amazing Grace:


These deplorable social and moral conditions, which Eric's book reveals in much greater depth, began with the loss of what Wilberforce called, "real Christianity." Following his own conversion at the age of twenty-five, Wilberforce would write about the state of the church in Britain saying, "With Christianity, professing Christians are little acquainted. Their views of Christianity have been so cursory and superficial that they have little more than perceived those exterior circumstances which distinguish it from other forms of religion. These circumstances are some few facts, and perhaps some leading doctrines and principles, of which they cannot be wholly ignorant. But of the consequences, relations, and practical uses of these principles, they have few ideas—or none at all." This same statement could easily be applied to the church in our own day in America.

This point is reinforced by Eric Metaxas' in-depth exposition of eighteenth-century British culture. Eric writes:


In essence, the moral decadence of eighteenth-century Britain was the result of a process similar to our own. A nation once characterized by its Christian faith had gradually become unfaithful. The church retreated from its mission and the increasingly secularized culture was all too willing to hasten its departure. Christian ideas and values were replaced by secular humanistic schemes and utilitarian values. To the faithful Christians of that era, the situation must have seemed as hopeless as our own.

However, history records that William Wilberforce—buoyed by the spiritual movements of John Wesley and George Whitefield—would live to see his nation and the world utterly changed by God. Not only would the most evil institution in the history of the world be abolished—human slavery—but the world's superpower, Great Britain, would experience extraordinary moral, social, and spiritual reform that would last for nearly another century. The faithfulness of these few followers who took the Bible seriously and who refused to lay down and die in the face of what seemed impossible would serve to bless the whole world. Beyond rendering slavery an unacceptable evil, the unprecedented missionary activity of the nineteenth century and the formation of countless missionary and relief organizations (some of which still exist) stand as a reminder to Wilberforce and his faithfulness. 

© 2009 by S. Michael Craven

IF YOU ARE IN THE DALLAS-FT. WORTH AREA, I INVITE TO HEAR AND MEET ERIC METAXAS

This Thursday evening, October 22nd at 7:00 p.m., you are invited to Trinity Presbyterian Church in Plano, TX, and hear Eric Metaxas as he illuminates this remarkable period in history. You will be inspired and encouraged as we are reminded that our God reigns and he is often pleased to bless the nation on behalf of a few faithful followers.

For more information on this free event visit our website.

For those you of you outside the Dallas-Fort Worth area I would strongly encourage you to read Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery by Eric Metaxas. This is unquestionably the best biography that I have ever read!

---

Respond to this article here

Subscribe to Michael's weekly commentary here

Subscribe to Michael's podcast here
 

---

S. Michael Craven is the President of the Center for Christ & Culture and the author of Uncompromised Faith: Overcoming Our Culturalized Christianity (Navpress, 2009). Michael's ministry is dedicated to equipping the church to engage the culture with the redemptive mission of Christ. For more information on the Center for Christ & Culture and the teaching ministry of S. Michael Craven, visit: www.battlefortruth.org
 

A recent study reports that rock and pop stars are "more than twice as likely to die an early death." According to research published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, "When compared with the rest of the population in the UK and the US, rock and pop stars were around twice as likely to die early and even more likely to do so within five years of becoming famous." Names like Elvis Presley, Jim Morrison, and most recently Michael Jackson immediately come to mind.

While the aforementioned study focused on pop and rock stars, fame in general seems to exact a heavy toll. The dissolution of Jon and Kate Gosselin's marriage, Lindsey Lohan's infantile recklessness, Heath Ledger's tragic overdose, and Owen Wilson's suicide attempt in 2007 reminds us of the frequently high price of celebrity. The news continually invites us to follow the parade of depressed, addicted, and reckless celebrities into rehab, which has become a burgeoning industry in its own right. In fact, Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew, which launched in January 2008, has become popular entertainment.

Yet despite the ample and never-ending evidence that fame, fortune, and beauty fail to bring lasting peace and satisfaction—in fact, often quite the contrary—Americans are more celebrity-obsessed than ever. I am not making light of the suffering of those who happen to be famous. I am saddened for the lives of those who have come to ruin in such a public way. What caring human being cannot be troubled by the public destruction of Jon and Kate's family, the tragic course of Michael Jackson's life, or even the morally vacuous Paris Hilton, who is as much a victim of irresponsible, over-indulgent parenting as anything else? We should be deeply concerned for a society that has elevated mere celebrity to hero status and for a church that has been flaccid in asserting the true virtues of heroism.

In his excellent book, True Heroism in a World of Celebrity Counterfeits (NavPress, 1995), Dick Keyes writes that:

Throughout history, most generations have passed their values on to their children not by giving them lists of rules and laws to follow, but principally by telling them stories that embody the values of their culture.


Keyes adds, "Our fascination with heroes comes from a hunger for excellence. Without heroes the whole source of imaginative motivation is disengaged from life. Without heroes, what will inspire us to go beyond mediocrity and cynicism? What will keep us from becoming bored and boring?" And what do bored people do? They seek after the idols of amusement, food, and things to assuage and/or medicate their boredom. This might account for the plethora of giant screen TVs, the epidemic of childhood obesity, and rapacious consumerism so rampant in our culture.

Jonathan Swift, the Irish cleric and author of Gulliver's Travels wrote, "Whoe'er excels in what we prize, appears a hero in our eyes." This might explain, in part, the cultural shift from true heroes to the celebrity-as-hero phenomenon. What we prize has changed! Whereas we once prized honor, integrity, virtue, courage, and the like, we now prize fame, fortune, and beauty. The celebrity serves as the ideal "hero" in such a culture, despite their apparent moral failures and lack of any real virtue, because even in their worst moments, they often still retain their fame, fortune, and beauty. With the jettisoning of biblical values (i.e., virtue), celebrities have become the default heroes of the age and these are the "stories"—along with their bankrupt values—to which our children are subtly encouraged to aspire.

Even within Christian circles we have begun to see the infiltration of the celebrity-based valuation. There are a growing number of pastors, authors, and public figures who are lauded not for their substantive teaching and theological knowledge but because they have achieved some level of fame. Churches frequently rely on the "celebrity-testimonial" to attract audiences. Why? Because it works! I have heard a number of these good people and I've often been shocked by their inability to articulate a coherent faith. Being famous seems to be all that matters.  

MTV, that great creator and purveyor of false heroes, commissioned a study on youth from the research firm Social Technologies. Researchers reported that "Youth, especially younger people, fantasize about fame …" Nearly one-third said they wanted to be famous. Being famous has become their career goal! The tragedy is that these young people simply aspire to fame and riches and not to any sort of moral excellence or virtue.

We have allowed the culture to redefine heroism and human excellence based on what the world values. Dick Keyes is here again helpful:


The answers to these questions are ultimately found in Christ. True heroes are not always "the visible winners in our society." Such was the certainly the case with Jesus, whose earthly ministry appeared to suffer the ultimate defeat but in the end he was the ultimate hero in all of human history. Jesus Christ—fully God and fully man—embodies the highest aspirations of love, moral virtue, self-sacrifice, and courage. Christ, the true hero, engages our imagination and motivates us to try to make that virtue—those kingdom values and principles—our own. Granted, we must be aided in these efforts by the power and presence of the Holy Spirit but for those whose souls have been quickened by His grace, the choice to "seek first the kingdom" remains ours.

The church must seek first to embrace and live out these seemingly upside-down virtues of Christ and his kingdom. We must recover the belief that Jesus Christ is the standard by which all heroes are to be measured and the church must pass these virtues to its children in more compelling ways than feeding kids pizza and treating them to video games!

Our failure in this area has resulted in changed cultural values, which in turn has changed our "heroes." Subsequently our stories have changed. Instead of inspiring a generation to excellence in moral virtue, we are increasingly indoctrinating children in secular humanist propaganda over and against biblical truth. Perhaps offering schoolchildren the story of the Good Samaritan would better serve the needs of society than the story of Heather Has Two Mommies!

(DISCLAIMER: The subject of this article is NOT about Elvis Presley nor is it a condemnation of Elvis Presley [or any other celebrity figure] so please do not write to me and tell me that I have maligned a "great Christian man" by including his name among the notable famous whose lives came to tragic ends.)

© 2009 by S. Michael Craven

Respond to this article here

Subscribe to Michael's weekly commentary here

Subscribe to Michael's podcast here
 

---

S. Michael Craven is the President of the Center for Christ & Culture and the author of Uncompromised Faith: Overcoming Our Culturalized Christianity (Navpress, 2009). Michael's ministry is dedicated to equipping the church to engage the culture with the redemptive mission of Christ. For more information on the Center for Christ & Culture and the teaching ministry of S. Michael Craven, visit: www.battlefortruth.org