I sort of want to say, "Meh."

But I understand his wanting to name an enemy. And the term "religion" or even "church" for that matter, is so broad and non-specific as to be almost be unusable.

Jesus was fully formed, shaped and participated in a religious framework. And his students continued to do so after his ascension, until they set upon the work of taking his approach to Judaism to the Greek world (a kind of reformed or fully realized Judaism) which organically morphed into Christian communities.

What is frustrating about sentiments like those mentioned above is that this young man can only process and exegete the ideas he ultimately celebrates at the end of his poem because of the difficult and convoluted work of a wide variety of intentional and organized religious communities over the millennia, all of whom wrestled with various frameworks and epistemologies that all had religious underpinnings. Yes, of course it was diffuse and sometimes disorganized, periodically toxic and hurtful. But what human endeavor is not?

So to answer the question of whether or not Jesus came to do away with religion, I answer with a resounding "no."

Jesus came to expand, fulfill and complete the essence of the Jewish message, which was intended to be universal and redemptive. Our efforts should be given to seeing that realized. And organizing communities that work through ideas and experiences together IS a religious endeavor and will always have some tendency toward institutionalization. The answer isn't to pretend that its possible to pursue these truths without that occurring (it isn't) it's to work for healthy and honest communities.

The issue with many communications of this sort is that, if one is not careful, one becomes the very thing that one opposes. In this case, the overly contrived delivery of the message almost becomes organized religion, in that it's a stylized way, reflecting certain cultural reference points, to communicate a certain truth. So, I recognize the validity of the underlying point, which is that faith and organized religion are not one and the same. But organized religion can be a way to grow, live, and express one's faith.

Eric Bonetti

" What is frustrating about sentiments like those mentioned above is that this young man can only process and exegete the ideas he ultimately celebrates at the end of his poem because of the difficult and convoluted work of a wide variety of intentional and organized religious communities over the millennia, all of whom wrestled with various frameworks and epistemologies that all had religious underpinnings

" What is frustrating about sentiments like those mentioned above is that this young man can only process and exegete the ideas he ultimately celebrates at the end of his poem because of the difficult and convoluted work of a wide variety of intentional and organized religious communities over the millennia, all of whom wrestled with various frameworks and epistemologies that all had religious underpinnings."

I agree with this. And I think it's something we could think more about teaching, too. I kind of think these days that we ought to be asking really basic questions like this. What is Christianity really saying? What does that imply for us as human beings? What does it say about how we see ourselves in relation to the world?

There 's a lot more there than ever gets talked about because it seems so obvious or something - but I think getting back to basic questions could really help in communicating in the post - Christendom world.

Preparing to celebrate the life of my third Christmas Arts lady to die in the last six weeks. These ladies met every Thursday for most of the last 60 years to make crafts to sell for the benefit of All Souls' and it's ministries.
That is faithful commitment, eh? Good times or bad they expressed their love of Christ in dedicated service.
What might that mean about the Church and the life of faith?

"I post this here because I suspect he represents a very widely held set of notions among Millennials."

I'm a "Millennial" (I'm 21). And I sort of take issue with this conclusion.

I first came across this video on Facebook, where it has been posted and reposted by my friends who are evangelical Christians. These are not "young folks who not only don’t darken the doors of churches, but don’t see any reason for doing so." These are young folks who go to contemporary worship services and Bible College. They get married right out of high school. They start or attend hipster congregations. They really value their religious identity, but they don't always identify with the bigotry and hatred that has come to be associated with evangelical Christianity.

The speaker, Jeff Bethke, doesn't hate church. His website states that he is "[currently] attending Mars Hill Church in Federal Way, WA." He's not trying to do away with church and neither are most of the fans of this video, at least in the circles I run in. I think he is trying to reform the church that he's a part of. I wouldn't be surprised if he saw his videos as a sort of "prophetic critique" of his own tradition.

So I would say that the video is being taken out of context if we hear the speaker saying that we should get rid of church. He isn't *really* calling for the abolishment of religion; he wants to ditch a certain kind of religious practice. Also, the "notions" that he's talking about are held by some young people, but generally by a specific subset of young people who are also a part of the evangelical tradition. Kids whose "concerns simply don’t mesh" with church aren't even watching this video.

Willie Goforth

Michael,

Thank you for your point about service as an expression and manifestation of faith. One thing that has saddened me several times in recent years is when elderly parishioners in various churchs have been utterly ignored when suffering from terminal illnesses. Indeed, one person I know, much-loved within her parish, who had given thousands of hours of her time to the church over the years (and huge sums of money), had no priest at her wake--something that would have been tremendously meaningful to her. Was this too much to ask in a multi-priest parish?

The generosity of our older generations, many of whom learned to be quite frugal in their youth, is a lesson too often overlooked and under-appreciated.

Sorry, forgot to sign my previous post.

Eric Bonetti

Here's my friend Matt Kozlowski's video response:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCNnpelOMfk

I also thought Lutheran Pastor Nadia Bolz Weber was pretty good:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nadiabolzweber/2012/01/why-i-hate-religion-but-love-jesus-a-response/

Editors- I looked at the feedback policy, but didn't see anything about posting links; is it appropriate to do so, when related to the topic? If not, I apologize and will refrain in the future.

Thanks for checking Jonathan - links are allowed as long as they are not advertising.

The content of this video is covered in EFM, Year 4, Chapter 17. I just read and discussed it last week in my EFM group. What I take from this video and from what I read last week in EFM, is the church/religion can get in the way of Christianity/mission. Consequently, it is important that all decisions and structures in the church facilitate mission. If they do not, they are in the way and should be done away with.

I agree that the video may be misunderstood as a diatribe against church. Could it be that the young man speaks against lip service as opposed to serving God and God's people from the heart? Could it be an indictment of Christians who don't follow up their fine words with actions? That's what I heard in the video.

June Butler

What is the point of this? Do millenials really see this and think, "yeah!"? "My youth minister's awesome, he talks in [bad] poetry in an edgy video, cool!!" Give me a break. Next. Notice I'm not even addressing the message, it's trite and simplistic, a mere diatribe against hypocrisy, which is better aimed at specific instances than in general. And yet, I get the conflicting message of: "You call yourself a Christian, but you're sinning on Saturday night" and then "The Church is first of all for sinners." By the time he got to the blood running down from the crown stuff, at the end of the video, I was over it. There's a time for a bloody Jesus, and it's called Holy Week, the rest of the time it's dangerously close to torture porn. Would YOU want everyone rehearsing with glee the gruesome details of your torturous murder at the hands of an indifferent government? Maybe on the anniversary of the thing. The rest of the time, the meaning of it is more than sufficient. I probably disagree with this guy about that too.

Not just a river in Egypt. Yeah, sure, there are some things that I would probably phrase differently, but, come on, folks! Read the Gospels again! And then explain to me what this young man is getting wrong.

I think this is deeply related to Andrew's January 6 posting: http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/religious_studies/not_interested.html

Well, for one thing: churches DO feed the poor, and have for a long time, when nobody else did. Even today, churches are involved in doing mission work all over the world.

And as mentioned above, many people have spent years of their lives working through the church at all sorts of service to others.

Churches have built universities and hospitals, too.

Well, my frustration with the attitude conveyed in this video is based on a lot.
I'm frustrated by the idea that "religion" is the problem; it's not. Religion is the practice and expression of faith. But, especially among young, conservative evangelical adults, "religion" is seen as this unwelcoming, unfriendly set of rules to follow.
I'm frustrated that this sort of perspective (as presented in the video) is considered new, edgy, revolutionary -- but it's the same message that's being preached in any given conservative evangelical church. I'm frustrated that churches that appear to focus more on "religion" than "Jesus" (such as the Episcopal church) are considered less Christian, regardless of the fruit. Because of the tendency to assume that any recitation (of prayers or creeds) or "old traditions" (like hymns or liturgy) are empty and meaningless, but the latest songs from the big-name pop-worship groups are relevant. Or that food pantries are a ritual, but missionary work is meaningful. There's value to all of it, and dismissing anything "old" or "small" as a requirement of "religion" (not an expression of faith) only harms the Christian community as a whole. The fruit (whether a church or an individual) is more important than the appearance; if a community is improved in its overall atmosphere, whether by schools, religious programs, access to food and healthcare, or any other service-based or positive-aspect, that is a church or person focused on using religion to express faith. Conservative, liberal, regardless of denomination...religion is a tool to explore and express faith, not the extent of belief.
Sheena

Thanks Sheena - please sign your full name next time you comment. ~ed.

Thanks, Willie Goforth, for explaining the background and thrust of the video. Often, the opening says something quite well, but people kind of "fall off the bus" as the reasoning plays out, and I think that's part of some of the replying comments that I've read above.

We might take a second to define "Religion" in context, since the rift between Pharisee and Sadducee, the "Righteous" and the "Just," seems to be the main point in the video - and something that I'd hope we'd all agree on - in Jerusalem 2,000 years ago, or today!

I'm so "not a fan of Rap," that it took me a few lines to catch on that it's a rap piece, but afterward, I still enjoyed it! Thank you, Andrew Gerns, for putting it where I'd find it too!

Blessings!
Rev. CW Brockenbrough