Concerns about the materialism of the modern evangelical church were expressed in the first part of this series, and can be reviewed here. The response of Bud Brown, which you can read here [Editor’s Note: When we transferred our 2006 faith-related posts to the Joshua One blog, we lost the comments made on those posts], although much appreciated, left me more concerned than before. Mr. Brown’s experience might be different than what we have observed, and for his sake, I hope so. I hope his church is evangelism and evangelicalism personified, and I hope nothing said herein would be true about him or his church. Indeed, nothing said herein should be taken as a criticism of him or his opinion. Spirited discussion need not be interepreted as insult, and there is no such intent here.

I’m not opposed to the existence of large churches or even mega-churches. Successful evangelism might lead to both or either. I am opposed to church growth that leads only to the hording of resources to feed a live variety show on stage each Sunday morning. I am opposed to contingency salary arrangements that treat the sacred offerings and tithes of believers no better than cash register receipts. The substitution of expository preaching with Dear Abby sermons and the abandonment of diligent administration of the Word in favor of Ed Sullivan show clones is a crime against the Cross and the promotion of religious hedonism. It is growth for financial gain and not evangelism. It is the essence of anti-evangelicalism, and anti-ecumenicalism, and will inexorably lead to a mission field, here and abroad, with no Christian infantry to occupy it.

The first point that Mr. Brown made was that in the small evangelical church, “few, if any, of the church’s members actually live in the neighborhood” in which the small church is located. He explains this assertion by explaining:

Perhaps when the church was first planted, back in the 40s and 50s the church crowd was mostly locals. But, over the years, as the original membership aged and retired to Florida or died, they were not replaced by others in the neighborhood. If they were replaced at all they were replaced by people who drove in from elsewhere.

Mr. Brown’s premise, that small churches are dying embers that contain only members foreign to the neighborhood, is simply not true. Most of the evangelical churches in the country are both small and not dying. The studies I have been able to find that indicate that in certain locales Mr. Brown’s observations reflect the true environment are statistically limited or even statistically insignificant. There has been no true census. But, for the sake of the discussion, let’s assume Mr. Brown is exactly right.

Isn’t it then true that Mr. Brown has stated the proof that materialism is rampant in evangelical Christianity?

According to Mr. Brown, the hypothetical “original church membership” he describes did not evangelize the local community. Indeed, he seems to describe the white flight phenomenon method of church planting. The obvious implication of that is this: any evangelical church that does not evangelize its own community, and its own neighborhood, is not an evangelical church. It may be a Christian country club. It may be a Christian association. It might be a Christian sports grill or Christian night club. But, it is not an evangelical church. Ecumenical churches similarly afflicted would be no more savory. Evangelicals that are not evangelistic have “lost their savor.” Matthew 5:13. (more…)