The Shadow-gloom and Weight of the Sacred

It's not uncommon to hear people speak of, or to read about, Christianity as a revolt. Shane Claiborne's popular book is titled The Irristible Revolution: Living as an Ordinary Radial and the primary thrust of this book is a contrast between what Christianity has become (think Willowcreek, Saddleback churches) what Claiborne believes it should actually be. (I wrote a little about this book last year; I think it is a rather interesting perspective.) My own church background could accurately be described as primarily white, middle class/lower middle class, and Republican: a normal religious experience--for an Oklahoman, at least. There's nothing revolting about us (arguably). We did, however, periodically employ the language of revolvt to describe our faith. I think there is a little bit of cool factor at play here. Revolvt conveys something exciting and entices the imagination in a way "church" just can't seem to match.

In recent years, the language of revolvt within Christian circles has become commonplace, but the practices of Christians remain the same: assimilated to a pagan culture. By this I mean that Christians don't really do anything differently than non-Christians. Christians pursue the same things as non-Christians. Perhaps we are more self-righteous, maybe even a bit more pious, but we are nonetheless enticed by the wealth and affluence of our culture and have found(ed?) a religion that allows us to follow Jesus and follow wealth. This compromise has drastically altered the face of Christianity from what is described in the Bible. Not long ago, I heard a Christian talk about how his church had "budgeted justice ministries". I found that laughable. Right along with the church mortgage and the preacher's salary, we have made a place to fund the reversal of the sin problem! Want to guess which of the three budgeted items received the greatest percentage of the church budget?