In Northampton, Massachusetts, stands the old cemetery where David Brainerd is buried. Brainerd, a pioneer American missionary, died in 1747 at the age of twenty-nine after suffering from tuberculosis. His grave is beside that of Jerusha Edwards, the daughter of Jonathan Edwards, a Puritan theologian of that day. Brainerd loved Jerusha and they were engaged to be married, but he did not live until the wedding.

Imagine what hopes, dreams, and expectations for the cause of Christ were buried in that grave with the witherred body of that young missionary. At that point, nothing remained but memories and several dozen Indian converts! Yet, Jonathan Edwards, that majestic old Puritan saint, who had hoped to call Brainerd his son, began to write the story of that short life in a little book. The book took wings and few across the sea, and landed on the desk of a Cambridge student by the name of Henry Martyn.

Poor Henry Martyn! In spite of his education, brilliance, and great opportunities, he--after reading that little book on the life of Brainerd--threw his own life away! Afterward, what had he accomplished once he set his course toward home from India in 1812? With his health then broken, he dragged himself as far north as the town of Tokat, Turkey, near the Black Sea. There he lay in the shade of a pile of saddles, to cool his burning fever, and died alone at the age of thirty-one.

What was the purpose behind these "wasted lives?"  From the grave of a young David Brainerd, and the lonely grave of Henry Martyn near the shores of the Black Sea, have arisen a mighty army of modern Missionaries. (Leonard Woolsey Bacon)

"Is there some desert, or some boundless sea,
Where You, great God of angels, will send me?
Some oak for me to rend,
Some sod for me to break,

I enjoyed getting a glimpse into what all took place at the 2010 Lausanne Congress gathering and I hope you do too. 

“An atheist from Berkeley is here.”  The youth pastor’s statement caught me off guard.  I was sitting in a church lobby, reviewing notes for a talk I was about to give.  My first thought was, “What atheist in their right mind would drive from Berkeley to attend a youth apologetics conference in the Inland Empire?”  

Seeing my puzzled look the youth pastor offered more.  “His name is Tim.  He’s right over there.”  I glanced in the direction he pointed and recognized Tim immediately.  I had met Tim, a recent graduate from U.C. Berkeley, two years ago on one of our mission trips.  He had participated in a couple of our joint events with Berkeley’s atheist student club, S.A.N.E. (Students for A Non-religious Ethos), over the last few years.  I hadn’t seen Tim for more than a year and now here he was, attending an apologetics conference where I was speaking.  

At the break, Tim made his way to my resource table.  “Tim!” I exclaimed.  Tim smiled and appeared genuinely happy to see me.  Indeed, as he approached I grabbed his hand for a firm shake but additionally, he leaned in for a hug.  I was glad to embrace him, realizing this hug was no small gesture.  Often, when we imagine interactions between atheists and Christians we envision warfare, not friendship.  But despite our opposing views about Christianity, Tim is made in God’s image.  Tim is an intrinsically valuable human being deserving dignity and respect, not an enemy to be vanquished.

Reflection & Influence 

Christians love catch-phrases and keywords.  Making fun of or lamenting "Christianese" or the Christian subculture is a relatively easy and lazy thing to do.  The more fruitful approach - the one that would hopefully build up the church rather than armchair quarterback it - is to lovingly critique it.  

How we use language is something that really interests me.  It's something that's important to see and think about because, while I'm not a linguist, I can see that language carries with it two big factors.  First, language is a reflection of what we think, believe, and value.  Secondly, language influences what we think, believe, and value.

Blurred Definitions 

Which brings me to the word I want to bring up in this blog article: missional.  "Being missional" or "to be missional" has been a descriptive or imperative catch phrase for about the last five years, particularly among younger Emerging churches.  It's a word that I've always felt a little uncomfortable with because of it's ambiguity (but that's another article).

The late ’90s had “postmodern.” The first part of the 21st century introduced us to “emerging.” But over the last few years, there has been no bigger buzzword in Christianity than “missional.” It’s a word that has exploded into the popular vernacular of preachers, theologians and seminary professors. It has graced the covers of almost every major Christian publication. It has spawned books, seminars, conferences and endless blog debates. A growing number of congregations now describe themselves as “missional churches.” And proponents of the idea believe you and your church would do well to do the same. But what does it mean?

Has anyone else noted that Christian’s seem to be getting a little . . . touchy? I don’t know, maybe some are still simmering over the election (though most of the Christians I know voted for Obama). Maybe because of the economy? Maybe Darwin’s recent birthday.  Somehow Christians seem to feel a little defensive. A little “us against them,” like during the “culture wars” of the past.

The headline jumped out at me as I looked up to the Conversant Life site on my screen: “Can Christians be Darwinists?”  I was surprised. Do people somewhere in America still actually use the term “Darwinists?” What would happen if I casually walked up to a group of my friends and asked “hey, any of you guys Darwinists!?!” With all due respect and honor, I just honestly don’t get it. I noticed that the “Darwinist” blog stayed in the “most discussed” list for weeks, so it must be important to people. But I wonder, who do we think we are?

I've had an image in my head for two weeks.  I don't remember exactly how it came about but I can tell you the things that birthed it.  Here's a warning in advance for anyone who is trigger-happy either way at a mention of the name of our President: I'm going to mention him first simply because I think the example is indicative of a larger trend, so I promise it will be brief and we'll move on quickly from there.

The New York Times carried an account of a town hall-style meeting that Obama did in Greensboro, NC.

"Speaking at a town hall-style meeting here before a few thousand people, Mr. Obama was asked by a young man about the role that Jesus Christ and his teachings played in Mr. Obama’s life.

He began his response with a broad statement of faith: “I’m a Christian. What that means for me is that I believe Jesus Christ died for my sins, and, uh, and, and, uh, his grace and his mercy and his power, through him, I can achieve everlasting life.”

Invoking the golden rule, he also said he believed in treating all people of all faiths (as well as non-believers) with dignity and respect, and he noted that his mother was “not a believer as I am” – but was also the kindest person he ever knew.

“I’m sure she’s in heaven,” he said.

“I think it’s very important to think that you do not have to have the same faith as me to be a moral person – there are a lot of Jewish people who are as moral, or more moral than I am, there are a lot of Muslims who are decent kind people,” Mr. Obama said. “I don’t think they are any less children of God.”

My next dose of fuel came with a seeing a recent Barna Group Survey that contained these findings.

"Evidence of people’s willingness to part with church teaching was shown in other data from the survey regarding what people believe. Among individuals who describe themselves as Christian, for instance, close to half believe that Satan does not exist, one-third contend that Jesus sinned while He was on earth, two-fifths say they do not have a responsibility to share the Christian faith with others, and one-quarter dismiss the idea that the Bible is accurate in all of the principles it teaches."

And, more alarmingly astonishing, the Barna survey contained these "implications of the research".

"The Christian faith is less of a life perspective that challenges the supremacy of individualism as it is a faith being defined through individualism. Americans are increasingly comfortable picking and choosing what they deem to be helpful and accurate theological views and have become comfortable discarding the rest of the teachings in the Bible. "

"Faith, of whatever variety, is increasingly viral rather than pedagogical. With people spending less time reading the Bible, and becoming less engaged in activities that deepen their biblical literacy, faith views are more often adopted on the basis of dialogue, self-reflection, and observation than teaching. Feelings and emotions now play a significant role in the development of people’s faith views - in many cases, much more significant than information-based exercises such as listening to preaching and participating in Bible study."

Now, those pieces are loaded with things we can talk about and dissect, all of it harrowing news for the Church.  I want to keep it simple and point out the combination of relativism and moralism that appears in those reflections of American Christianity.  From Obama one second having a somewhat orthodox statement of faith and changing it minutes later to deny the exclusivity of Christ, to survey findings that make plain the average Christian's combination of Biblical illiteracy and emphasis on good deeds and ethics (the result of "Deeds not Creeds"), we need to see something evolving that other, more intelligent, and articulate men have dubbed "Moralistic, Therapeutic Deism".  It's like Oprah meets good ol' American can-do spirit.

Interview with Brett McCracken from CJ Casciotta on Vimeo.

CJ and Brett talk about Christian Hipsters, the Missional Movement, and Catch Phrases that should never be heard from again in 2009.