blurbat visited an Os Guiness lecture last night. I have mixed feelings. Mr. Guiness began with the premise that Christians are woefully ignorant of the Bible. That they are woefully ignorant of the history of ideas. And they don't even consider how technology shapes their thinking and being.
He went on to criticize:
1) Evangelicals, who only second to mainline protestants put Christianity to shame. Evangelicals are lacking because they are slaves to 'the world's values' in finding purpose in politics; and thereby not responding to culture wars with anything that could remotely be described as love.
2) The Emergent Church who are adopting 'post-modernism' just when everyone else is abandoning it. He mentioned 'A Generous Orthodoxy' as exemplary of this category.
3) The Episcopal Church (he is Anglican). Where in the US heretics are in charge and we look to our African brothers to hold the sacredness of the Truth.
4) Though mainline Protestants were singled out in one sentence as being first to Evangelical's second as offenders of Christianity; he didn't mention how so far as I could tell. Unless the Episcopal Church's (and now also the Lutherin) schism in this country is his only target here.
He went on to say that we are called to follow our Lord. To comit to discipleship, and to use our gifts in that sphere of influence that relates to the portion of talents we are given.
Overall, I thought the lecture was engaging but was too heavy on criticism. And my guess is that few of his targets of criticism were present in the audience so it seemed to me that the major thrust of his lecture was to point to the sins of those not there. This technique binds the audience in opposition to those groups that are criticized. Unfortunately I felt like I was in the midst of a scapegoating session rather than being under the tutledge of an elder with pearls of wisdom.
More scorn was heaped onto the Evangelicals than any other of his targets even though they only came in second place to mainline Protestants as betrayers of Christianity. During the hour long question and answer the story line was the same. With more discussion of those Evangelicals than any other topic.
"...so many people are so misinformed about evangelical Christians. There is a world of difference between real-life people of faith and the made-for-TV, Elmer Gantry-style blowhards who are selected to represent them. Falwell and Pat Robertson are held up as spokesmen for evangelicals, which is ridiculous. Meanwhile people like John Stott, who are actually important, get ignored."
Os Guiness appears to have acquired his view of people of faith from the Elmer Gantry-style blowhards. I read two recent interviews with Bono. He admits that he initially made the same assumptions about Evangeicals (as Os Guiness). But Bono pointed out that once he got to know them and enlisted their help in his causes, he found that his assumptions about them were completely wrong. Here's hoping Os Guiness and Bono meet to discuss what's really wrong with Christianity.
Posts
