I must confess, I haven’t gotten past chapter one.  Not for lack of reading, but for going back and re-reading several times.  With a highlighter.  So my comments today will be based only a section of chapter one.  I still find myself agreeing with almost all he has to say.  I still find myself questioning his need to keep evangelicalism as a subgroup or title for the church.

For those of you just tuning in, you can find the first post about The Great Giveaway… here.

On to the book, and specifically chapter one, ‘Our Definition of Success’.  Quoting Matthew 28, Fitch states:

Hypothetically at least, we could be achieving great success in the number of decisions for Christ and church attendance yet be failing in the ultimate purpose, that of making “disciples of all nations, baptizing them… teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you”  (Matt. 28:19-20).

I think more people are waking up to this fact.  There are more people latching on to the ideas of intentional community, house churches, and other forms of gathering together more intimately.  Even mega churches, with their idea of ‘plugging in’ in some sort of small group, realize that community happens on a smaller scale.  What I find so sad is our ability to forget history over and over and over again.  How hard is it for us to see that even Jesus could only manage 12 intimately.  So trying to shift to smaller groups is a step in the right direction.

However, it still does not address the idea of discipleship.  You can meet in small groups all day long, and if there isn’t some sort of discipleship taking place, some sort of accountability, some sort of correction, discussion, and encouragement about a full-life transformation, then it is just church-as-usual on a smaller scale.  Fitch says on pg. 37:

Indeed, salvation is the invitation to repent and become a subject of the kingdom of God (Matt. 3:1-3).  When one is converted, he is converted to a different way, to following Christ.  The decision to repent and turn leads one to enter the kingdom of God, the rule of Christ.  Conversion is the departure from an old world…

Fitch basically argues that the church views success in the numbers of decisions made for accepting Christ, regardless of any ‘fruit’ produced.  Yes, I agree with him wholeheartedly on this point.  But… he never states this directly.  Maybe he does later in the book, but his only reference in chapter one to fruitfulness is on pg. 45 and there he quotes theologian Stanley Hauerwas… And it doesn’t really fit the scripture in Matthew 7, but 16-20 particularly.  That is not to say he doesn’t address the subject, far from it, I just find it odd that such a scripture, so directly related to this chapter’s topic is never mentioned.

I’m jumping ahead in chapter one more than I had anticipated with this quote, but I feel it is the reason I think we are all over-analysing the state of the church, myself included.  Fitch states on pg. 43:

…Of course, “success” will be an unfortunate word no matter how we use it.  It has roots deep within the capitalist way of life.  Nonetheless, we need an understanding of the goals of our existence as being the body of Christ and a means to test whether we indeed are heading in that direction.

…We still measure success so that we know if we are truly getting somewhere.

No, no we don’t.  We don’t need questionnaires, or focus-groups, or surveys.  This is why I held on to my reservations about the need to keep evangelical as a title or ‘brand’ of church.  If we need those things, then we are not deep enough into a relationship with the people we are handing them out to.  For me, I start to lose sight of all the great insights and suggestions Fitch has when he throws these little comments in to ’save’ evangelicalism.  If evangelicalism as we know it was built on modernity, and modernity has commodified the evangelical church, why keep evangelicalism?  Why not let the title go?

Evangelicalism still maintains a hierarchy and the hierarchy is the problem.  It allows the person sitting in the pew/fold-out chair to maintain plausible deniability about their responsibilities.  Now I will say that maybe, when it is all said and done and if evangelicalism could be successfully separated from modernity, maybe evangelicalism could be saved.  But at that point, isn’t it just ‘the church’, no title of description needed?

Still, I am thoroughly enjoying this book.  And in case I have caused some people to not want to pick up this book, here are some quotes that keep me coming back and reading out loud to my wife.

…We are attracted to big numbers because we think they measure effectiveness.

…Effectiveness and efficiency draw their agendas from American cultural forces that define success in terms of numbers, size, and capital.  This kind of effectiveness may be alien to Christ’s church.

And I love this line (emphasis mine):

…Despite the disclaimers – “we know that numbers are not what is most important but…” – we evangelicals remain obsessed with them whether the be decisions for Christ, church attendance, church finances, or otherwise.  This is regrettable considering the recent proliferation of statistical data purporting that evangelical churches, despite their growing numbers, show a constituency with higher rates of divorce, materialism, more ministers having extramarital affairs, and a general lack of any effect on their immediate surrounding culture.” 

I’ll stop there, but I want to dive into this first chapter once or twice more before moving on.  Seriously, get this book.

-mike