Tod Bolsinger

Can’t Have One Without the Other

Cue Music: The theme song from Married with Children, “Love and marriage, love and marriage, go together like a horse and carriage…..Can’t have one without the other”…Trust readers get the sarcasm…

I want to thank the folks who have commented on previous posts for “carrying the ball” on this conversation about the kind of church we need to be for the “Christian seekers” who have been disillusioned with the church and have gone searching for a better way of living the faith.  I have been calling it “Bono, Neo and GK:  Welcoming the Adventurers”

We have been considering two friendly and familiar friends as foils for our conversation.  The rock star Bono, whose edgy faith, prophetic exhortations about the African AIDS and lack of church attendance makes him practically the poster child for an iconoclastic evangelicalism and Neo the hero of Brian McClaren’s “New Kind of Christian” novels who embodies the “emergent” approach to a “post-modern faith” that is questioning many of the assumptions of church life, tradition and in some cases, belief statements, as a way of re-discovering Christian faith in and for a more pluralistic world. 

So far, I have put forth the notion that the first strategy for welcoming these “adventurers” who arrive in our churches “armed to the teeth and talking by signs” (as G. K. Chesterton characterizes all such seekers looking for new worlds but sadly arriving back where they started from) is for those of us who are leaders and members of churches to emphasize belonging before believing.  Our first priority is to offer welcome, not conversion, hospitality not orthodoxy. 

Please hear me loud and clear.  This is the FIRST priority, not the FINAL.  This is the first strategy, not the only one.  Indeed, the goal is nothing less than all of our churches being communities of discipleship of Jesus Christ.  The goal is deep, committed communities of genuine, life transforming belief that witness to the renewing presence of God in the world restoring all of creation. 

But, that goal is what is so often debated.  Most of us tend to think that the goal of salvation is “going to heaven” or “getting saved”.  We put forward faith as a “personal decision” of a “personal relationship” with my “personal savior” Jesus Christ.  That focus on individual souls (specifically MY individual soul) leads us to then miss the significance and sine qua non quality of the church.  And then make us think that we can divorce believing from belonging. 

So, in order to lay my cards on the table about this “belonging first” thing, let me demonstrate the end I have in mind, by offering up this excerpt from my book, It Takes a Church to Raise a Christian: How the Community of God Transforms Lives.

For most Christians, both new guest and church leaders, the local church is usually regarded as a benign reality.  We honor the Church and may even use the traditional language in declaring it a "means of grace."  But most often we think of the Church as a "strategy" or a "system" for local evangelistic efforts, social change, or a dispenser of resources to help the individual on his or her Christian journey.  Churches are offered like different shops are offered at a mall. Indeed, the largest churches offer themselves as a kind of spiritual mall in itself, bidding the seeker: Come here and choose from our wide array of Christian classes, teachings, activities, that which you need to live out your individual Christian life. 
In this model the church is a repository of spiritual goods that assist the individual Christian. It is a vendor of religious services.  It is The Home Depot for the spiritual do-it-yourselfer who wants to build a Christian home. 

But that is not the Church of the first century.  The Church of the first century is “a people.”  And the transformed and transforming quality of “the people” serving as the flesh and blood witness to a life-transforming God is the point. As 1 Peter 2:9-10 says:

"You are a chosen people. You are a kingdom of priests, God's holy nation, his very own possession. This is so you can show others the goodness of God, for he called you out of the darkness into his wonderful life. 
        Once you were not a people;
        now you are the people of God.
        Once you received none of God's mercy;
        now you have received mercy."  (NLT)

This is what I want to remind us: The Church is God's incarnation today.  The Church is Jesus' body on earth.  The Church is the temple of the Spirit. The Church is not a helpful thing for my individual spiritual journey.  The Church is the journey.  The Church is not a collection of “soul-winners” all seeking to tell unbelievers “the Way” to God.  The Church is the Way.  To be part of the Church is to be part of God—to be part of God’s Communion and to be part of God’s ministry.  To belong to the people of God is to enjoy relationship with God and live out the purposes of God.  The Church is God’s present day word and witness to an unbelieving world.   And, most importantly, the Church is the only true means to be transformed to into the likeness of God.

The starting point of felt needs, cultural factors, contemporary relevance cannot and should not be ignored, but neither should the final vision for which we are elected, saved and toward which we must journey.  The Church is Christ’s body, the dwelling place or temple of God, and a reflection of God on earth.

Post-Modern, Missional and the Direction of things

Craig Williams, a church planter in South Orange County, CA offers this perspective on post-modernity, by citing one of the best books I know:
Link: tabletalk.

The first observation comes from a book, Missional Church, edited by Darrell Guder for the Gospel and Our Culture Network. They make a great point that post-modern doesn't describe where we're going, merely what we are leaving. This is helpful because there are many modern things that we will take with us and many modern things that will come with us for a while even as we leave some behind. We are moving away from, but have not separated from modernity. We are moving toward something as well, though what, is not apparent.

Satire and Seriousness: More Emergent News...

Trying to get back to my pre-Blog review conversation, I found this bit at Rev. Mikes-House-of-Homiletical-Hash:

Local Emergent Church Recedes

Rancho Buena Vista Community Church, until recently called Vista Journey, has "receded" from the "emergent" church movement, according to its pastor, Andrew Hardy. "Actually, Rancho Buena Vista Community Church was always our name. We only changed it for about six months while we were trying to 're-vision' ourselves in a way that would reach out to the 'postmodern' culture," said Hardy, making heavy use of air quotes. "Yeah, we were really into that whole 'emergent' thing for quite a while. But it got old real fast. Like I'm really gonna preach in a recliner for the rest of my career! I finally decided 'emerging' wasn't for us, and so I called a meeting of the 'Vision Keepers,' our fancy name for an elders board. We just decided to go back to being a regular old receding church."

Let me encourage those who are prone to comment here to go to Rev Mike's site and see the comments.

I also want to thank Derek and Tim for the good conversation going on about "things emergent" here.  Both good guys, with deep faith, insight and Christian conviction, they come from different ends of the spectrum in terms of life experience.  One of the great things about this blog thing is that I know them both personally and they have never met (and would likely never meet), but through this forum we are all enriched by their good conversation.

Keep at it, guys, and I'll be back with another post on Monday to keep the conversation lively.

Blog, for Christ’s sake.

Note: I will be returning to a series (I am now calling) "Bono, Neo and G.K.: Welcoming the Adventurers" by saying more on the idea that the first emphasis of the church should be helping people experience belonging, even before believing.  But, now, one more post on Hugh Hewitt’s book, Blog: Understanding the Information Reformation that’s changing the world.  (This will be a bit long, because I want to move back to my other series with my next post, but I think encouraging pastor-bloggers is important for the Kingdom.)

In my last post I argued that pastors, of all people, should blog because we have a vested interest in something that the blogosphere makes more readily available: To more effectively, cheaply and regularly communicate the elements of Christian faith to a wider number of people.  This will also, I argued, encourage our long-term pastorates and presence in our home churches (and families) by making it easier to reach larger numbers of people each week without leaving home.

Today I want to also add that blogging allows us to be far more effective at communicating Christian truth in depth, and responding to challenges to the faith effectively, broadly and without delay.  Let me highlight both briefly by focusing on two terms that Blog helps us better understand.

In Blog, Hugh Hewitt uses a number of political examples to demonstrate the way in which bloggers can give attention to crucial issues that are often overlooked by the “mainstream media”.  Very often TV news, magazines and such are not only victims of the biases (aren’t we all), but are handcuffed by the perception of the public’s “short attention span.”  So, complicated news stories are quickly eclipsed by the sound bite.

We pastors fall into this trap also.  When our congregants expect us to deliver sermons filled with strong exegesis, relevant examples and a joke or two all in 25 minutes or less (ok, I’m a Presbyterian…some of you get a lot more time than that.) It is easy to develop the habit of reducing everything to the ridiculous.  Pretty soon our theology is nothing more than slogans or acronyms or representative stories.  And communicating the depths of crucial issues and doctrine go by the way side.  (By the way, publishers are doing the same thing with books.  Unless you are NT Wright, it’s pretty hard to publish something that is long, in-depth and requiring serious study.  So most books are necessarily short (and often shallow).

With a web log, I don’t have to worry about “sales” and “numbers,” I can offer a “serial” of teachings that can go as far or as deep as I need to go.  I don’t worry about running out of time or getting the service over before the childcare team is pulling their hair out, instead I just pick up the discussion in the next post.  Long deep conversations are more readily available to more people who are eager to go deeper, and those who aren’t can move on and check back in later. 

As a guy with a Ph.D. in the “ecclesiastical and transformative implications of the doctrine of the Trinity,” it’s nice to have a place to actually write about the Trinity without fearing that 500 people will skip church next week.  When I want to probe a subject, I can linger as I long as I like.

In the few weeks that I been doing this blog thing, I have been really blessed to read and link to a number of incredibly thoughtful, easily accessible posts by pastors and theologians that have strengthened and inspired me.

If we pastors are going to blog, then let’s fulfill our calling and equip the saints and teach the church.  Let’s not limit this blogging thing to just “promotion” of our “stuff”, but instead allow it to be a true extension of our ministries to mature the faithful.

The second and most dramatic example of the power of blogging, is demonstrated in Hugh’s discussion of the speed of the blogosphere, “swarming” and the “long tail”.  Speed is just the reality of how information can be linked instantly around the globe.  Swarming is the way in which a number of people from a number of different positions “swarm” a challenge or opportunity and maximize the effectiveness of their position.  The “long tail” refers to the huge, cumulative effect of a number of small opinion makers to make a difference over a long term.

If you followed the blogs immediately after the annual “let’s demythologize and debunk Christianity just in time for the holiday editions” of Time and Newsweek, then you saw the overwhelming and rapid effectiveness of literally hundreds of pastors who posted thoughtful, cogent, articulate responses to the unscholarly and, in some instances, irresponsible articles published by the newsmagazines.  The blogosphere allowed even those who would never be quoted by the LA Times an opportunity to respond and then be linked and disseminated across the world in minutes.

No longer do we have to our faith-affirming responses relegated to the “letters to editor” pages a week after the fact while the front pages are filled with long-debunked scandals that might sell a few papers.  Instead by writing and linking and writing and linking, we can respond to the challenges posed by skeptics, not with the hue and cry of the hurt, but with the rapid, clear and sober answers that reveal the truth.

(I have already been thinking of how powerful the blogosphere will be next year when the movie version of “The Da Vinci Code” is released.  We can now address the questions that film will inevitably raise by bringing people solid accessible teaching right to their home computers.)

Another example of how blogs help us respond to challenges, now oft-cited has been the history-making response of internet donations to relief efforts in the wake of the Tsunami disaster.  While I needed to wait until Sunday to encourage my congregation to give generously, I (along with virtually every other pastor-blogger I know) posted a link on my blog to World Vision as soon as I could and within hours of the disaster, money was pouring in.

My friends, the blogosphere offers us opportunities to faithful put forth clear witness for Christ in large and influential numbers. So perhaps the final word is appropriately a warning. Like any technology, it can be used for good or evil.  In his book Hugh reminds us, “The blogosphere is about trust.”  Let’s pray for each other, dedicate ourselves to be worthy of the trust that our readers give us.  Let’s hold each other accountable and pray that our postings will only encourage more and more people to trust both the messengers—and more importantly, the message that we bring.

Blog on.

How Hugh’s Book Will Help You Get It: A review.

I’ll return to my series on The Bono Effect and Christianity as a “practical romance” soon, but I have to interrupt it for two posts on Hugh Hewitt’s new book, called, appropriately enough, Blog.  And these posts are aimed mainly for pastors (and for church members who are trying to figure out why their pastor does this "blogging thing.")

Today, “How Hugh’s Book Will Help You Get it.”  Tomorrow, “Blog, for Christ’s sake.”

Hugh as most any reader to this little site knows is the grandfather of my blog.  You see, he harassed Mark Roberts until Mark started a blog, and Mark harassed me until I started mine.  (Today Mark offers a great blog roll of Blogging Pastors.  And Mark is really the unofficial dean of this group.) 

Truthfully, when I started this blog on October 7 I still didn’t get it.  I wish had read Hugh’s book then.  Because that is what that book does best.  Hugh sees blogging as a new information reformation and the book documents his case.  (BTW, like an anecdote that Hugh tells, the spell check in my current version of Microsoft Word thinks that “blogging” is misspelled.)

As I said, back then, I didn’t get it.  I just blogged because Mark said it was a good way to get some ideas out and get some people to interact with my writing.  Now, three months and 20,000 hits later, it’s coming into focus.  This blog thing is powerful.  If you read his book, you will get it much easier.  Bottom line: There is no more effective, cost efficient, time efficient and growing way to communicate something as important as the truth of Christianity than through a whole hosts of pastors and teachers blogging.  And, if Hugh is correct, this is only the beginning of a whole "reformation."

Hugh uses terms like “swarming” and “long tail” and the generosity of bloggers to describe a way of communicating that is revolutionary just because it lets little guys like me get some of my thoughts into the world of ideas.  While this may not seem like that big of a deal, consider this: 

Every Sunday, I preach to 850-1000 people.  But by Tuesday of each week, my blog that is only a few weeks old is read by another 850-1000 people.  By the time Saturday rolls around and I am putting the finishing touches on my next sermon, my writing ministry has touched 3000 more people. (And if Hugh links to this review, I will get—no lie—2500 more hits in one day.)  That is an amazingly effective use of my pastoral time. 

Another thing to consider: The impact of the blogosphere may even lead to longer pastorates. (Something that I believe in very deeply.) I once had someone tell me that every pastor longs for a bigger audience and that the lure of leaving one (smaller) church for another (bigger) church will always loom before them.  That may or may not be true.  (The size of my church really fits me well.) But I do know that pastors put in a lot of time on their sermons, and to have those messages, easily, quickly and cheaply go far beyond the wall of their sanctuaries seems to me to be a no brainer.  It is quite effective to be able to reach more people without having to leave their current call or without having to travel at all. 

Frankly, unless you are Tony Campolo or Rick Warren, you are not going to get asked to preach to an additional 20,000 people beyond your church in the next three months.  But, if you started a blog today, by Easter you will.

I predict that ten years from now, church leadership boards will almost require their pastors to blog so that the ministry will be more effective and the pastor can have a bigger ministry without having to leave home to get it.

Tomorrow, how blogging for Jesus can make a much bigger difference than we have ever imagined.

More on Belonging

I received an email from one of my Ph.D. mentors, Dr. Ray Anderson, Professor of Theology and Ministry at Fuller Theological Seminary who I guess lurks on my blog from time to time (or at least this once!)

Ray wrote the following:

You don't mention it, and I am sure you are aware of it, but in your recent post on Belonging before Believing, I was reminded of the line by Michael Polanyi which I quoted in my own Dissertation (eons ago!!), 

"Our believing is conditioned at its source by our belonging," (Personal Knowledge, p. 322, cited in Historical Transcendence and the Reality of God, p. 205). 

In checking on this, I also came across the quote from  J. G. Hamann which I cited (p. 238), "In a world of fugitives, one who moves in the opposite direction, will appear to run away,"

Some times I wonder which direction the church is going!!

Ray Anderson

While I am at it, let me also add a plug for Ray's book, Ministry on the Fireline. It is certainly a must read for those pastor types who want to think and do ministry from a deeply biblical starting point.

PS>  Ray also has a new book out that sounds great.  It's called The Soul of God: A Theological Memoir.  I am ordering a copy right now. 

Bono, Neo! Want a Place to Belong?

If you have been following these posts thinking that I am criticizing Bono and Neo you are only partly right.  In truth, I don’t know Bono and Neo is, of course, fictional.  So criticizing them is a bit odd.

Further, Bono is really the quintessential Christian Gnostic, Neo only inspires it in some.  (As a friend pointed out, in the first book, Neo attended and tithed to a local church. In the second book, he leads his own worship service on a boat.  In both cases, he is demonstrably NOT trying to be individualistic in a Bono-esque way, but does pose a challenge to the inadequacy of ordinary churches.)

In actuality, I’d love to be the pastor of the kind of church that either Bono or Neo (if he was real) would come to.  Partly because they are both really cool and partly because I like U2’s music and the way Neo drinks beer while talking about tortoises and ministry.

(Note of thanks: Brian McClaren’s analogy—from the mouth of Neo—of churches today being like filling stations that used to give both “leaded and unleaded” fuel was one of the single best insights I have ever heard in ministry.)

But, what I really want is for my church—or any church—to be the kind of healthy, committed community of authentic believers that an individualistic (but obviously wounded by the church) Christian like Bono, and a reforming, prophetic (and disappointed in the church) Christian like Neo would find refreshing, challenging and real.

So, to that end, I now offer some suggestions for change in the church, starting with this one: our first emphasis should be belonging before believing. 

The church should offer people the the invitation to belong to the community of God's people even before they figure out what it means to believe in Christ. I don't mean formal "membership" in the sense that churches like mine offer it, but I do mean that someone should feel welcome and at home, experiencing life in the community as the witness to God's own presence, as the first priority before making a faith commitment. The church's first emphasis should be offering belonging, even before teaching faith.

I didn’t make this up, in fact, it is one of the central ideas from George G. Hunter’s book, The Celtic Way of Evangelism.  (This "ancient-future" text--to borrow Robert Webber's phrase--is certianly one of the most popular emergent and missional books.  It is also the most highly regarded book by my students in the “Evangelizing Nominal Christians” class I teach for Fuller Seminary--even more than mine!)

Hunter demonstrated that St. Patrick's ancient approach to evangelism of the "barbarians" of Ireland was to begin with offering welcome, hospitality and ministry to people and to hold off pushing for faith commitments until someone had truly experienced the faith through the community.

If the first emphasis of the church is creating a community of belonging, then Christian belief will be the fruit of an experience of the Triune God through genuine community with other Christians. (Which is what my book, It Takes a Church to Raise a Christian is all about.)

When the soil of faith is necessarily the dirt and fertilizer and weeds and rocks of a particular Christian group of people and not some ethereal personal Christian commitment, then genuine belief will be to confess your trust in Jesus and JOIN this (particular) body.  (Hence the need to confess faith and be baptized—which is, unless you are a Catholic, entirely about belonging to a faith community. Baptism is an entrance ritual. )

Interestingly, what Bono and most churches that he would never visit both would agree upon is the idea that believing is way more important than belonging.  Christian faith requires both—always.  But by emphasizing belonging--both the need to offer it and receive it--first, the Bonos and the churches would both have to confront just how often belief is not enough.

Tomorrow: Why I am not a heretic for saying this.

Note To Bono and Neo: Sorry, nothing new here

If you have been following the comments on the last few posts, you know that I have been attempting to open up a conversation about the church and its responsibilities to those who are disappointed and disconnected.  Let me be clear here that I am referring both to spiritual seekers (those who would not consider themselves Christians in any public way) and those, like Bono, the ultra-hip, prophetic voiced rock star and Neo, the equally hip, theologically astute, worldly and sentive, icon of post-modernity and "new kind of Christian" in Brian McClaren's "Adventures" novels are Christians but disconnected from what has been ruefully called "organized religion." 

In Tim Stafford's CT article, "The Church: Why Bother?" has wondered if this Bono-Neo is a kind of faith is a kind of Christian gnosticism. A spiritual pursuit that is disconnected from the earthly reality of everyday life like people, pews and pledge cards.  He examines with great sensitivity why people pull away from the church and by large concludes: It's because people let us down.

To which, I chime in: Yup.  There is nothing more disappointing and confusing than what Eugene Peterson calls "the mystery and mess of the church." 

Hard and bitter agony for us, like Death, our death.
We returned to our places, these Kingdoms,
But no longer at ease here, in the old dispensation,
With an alien people clutching their gods.
I should be glad of another death.

T.S. Eliot 1927

The concluding stanza of T. S. Eliot’s “Journey of the Magi” makes me think of so many of the Bonos and Neos of the world who have “left home”, traveled to a new experience of God and now are “no longer at ease here, in the old dispensation” of evangelical Christianity. 

Frankly much of what I read in the “missional church” movement literature, and the “emergent” conversation seems like this.  (And frankly, I like a lot of it.)  We who have become restless in the old secure way of talking about and doing the Christian faith venture out to find something new, only to find ourselves back where we started.  And in some ways more miserable and more glad at the same time. 

The new perspectives that we bring to the church when we have allowed ourselves to leave behind an old way of looking at things is like a birth indeed.  But soon we find that that birth is “a hard and bitter agony…like death…our death.” 

However, I fear when I drop in on the conversations of “younger evangelicals” (to use Robert Webber’s phrase) that they are still enamored with the newness of leaving home.  They are enjoying the shoving off from the old way and are speaking in rapturous terms of exploring new, organic and “emergent” ways of doing church.  That’s all well and good, but there is nothing new here.  Nor should there be.  Our aim as biblical seekers is nothing less than the recovery of the Scripture’s wisdom and ways.  And this, always includes the people sitting in the local, organized, regular congregation of Christians that are probably on your very block.

While deeply sympathetic to seeker movements, house churches, traveling with your own chaplain, the desire to "build-your-own community" or "plant a church for me and my generation," or call it "church" whenever I can get together with Christians who are like me and share my perspective and passion on life, I believe that this is still "adventuring without landing."  In short, they are not home yet, and so not yet either disappointed or relieved. 

The hard, good news of trying to build or be part of a genuine, authentic, scripturally rooted Christian community is that every attempt to “re-form” the church will only, must only, bring us back home again.  We must die to our love of the new and novel, die to our disappointment and disengagement, die to our desire to be on the cutting edge or part of some movement.  As for me, I find this particular death, a relief.  And am glad.

Tomorrow, however. Beyond disappointment to bringing change.

Bono's Miserable Practical Romance

Without intending to, my last couple of posts continued my reflection on G. K. Chesterton’s idea of Christianity as a “practical romance.”  While I intended to keep musing on what kind of church we need to be to welcome those who are “armed to the teeth and talking by signs”, who think they are trying to discover something new, but only arriving back home again, I instead stumbled upon two examples (one real and one imagined) of those very romantic adventurers.  For who better to represent the Christian magi today, those who are seeking a new world of faith, but keep (sadly?) stumbling back into the “old world” than Bono and Neo?

So, to return to the question that I ended my last post: What do we do to make the church more Bono-Neo friendly?

That’s where I’ll head for the next few posts, but I have to start with this caveat: I know that this is the wrong question.  The right question for the church is always first and foremost: How do we make the church a more faithful representative of God on earth?  Our efforts and musing must be first, for God’s sake, not the seeker.  For revealing Christ, not being relevant.  But, the church is always called to practice hospitality and in that way we must keep both outsiders and journeying friends in mind. 

So, perhaps the first thing those of us who are part of ordinary churches need to do in order to be helpful to the Bonos and Neos of the world is to be aware of how disappointing we are.  We are not nearly as exciting as prophetic minded people wish we were.  So many of them are simply looking for a gathering of like-minded adventurers.  But what they get instead is a gathering that God brought together by grace alone.  Which means that the church, if it is God’s church, will always make us a bit miserable.  (More on that tomorrow).

The Bono Effect

I'll be getting back to my new series of posts on "Christianity as a Practical Romance" soon, but today I want to offer another snippet from Tim Stafford's excellent article, "The Church: Why Bother" in the most recent Christianity Today.

In February 2003, Christianity Today featured Bono, lead singer for the rock group U2, and his campaign for the church to become more involved in the fight against AIDS. Bono emerged as a star example of the unchurched Christian.

Having once been involved in a loosely structured Irish fellowship, Bono now seldom goes to church. He does pray. He likes to say grace at meals. He has a favorite Bible translation. But he doesn't want to be pinned down.

"I just go where the life is, you know? Where I feel the Holy Spirit," Bono told Christianity Today's reporter, Cathleen Falsani. "If it's in the back of a Roman Catholic cathedral, in the quietness and the incense, which suggest the mystery of God, of God's presence, or in the bright lights of the revival tent, I just go where I find life. I don't see denomination. I generally think religion gets in the way of God."

In an editorial, "Bono's Thin Ecclesiology," CT appreciated Bono's thirst for social justice, yet criticized his lack of churchly commitment. Bono had voiced sharp criticisms of the church, suggesting it was in danger of irrelevance if it failed to act on AIDS. Wrote CT, "Any person can stand outside the church and critique its obedience to the gospel. Part of God's call on a Christian's life is to walk inside and die to self by relating to other human beings, both in their fallenness and in their redeemed glory."

Letters to the editor fiercely defended Bono. One pointed out that U2 travels with a chaplain—isn't that equivalent to church? Another suggested that Bono avoided church out of respect for other Christians, since his fame would disrupt worship. A reader complained that white evangelical churches were to blame for Bono's alienation, since they have become more Republican than Christian. Another reader whose lifelong illness kept her from church wrote, "I do not believe not attending a regular church service … takes away a person's beliefs, Christianity, or their salvation … . I have faith that Jesus Christ is more fair than that."

All good points, as far as they go, except that Bono is not too sick to attend church, could find an unpoliticized church if he tried, and doesn't mention respect for worshipers as a reason for staying away.

Clearly, Bono has chosen to keep his distance from the church, or at least to stay in the shallow margins of the pond, where he can dash for the shore at need.

He has plenty of company.

In my book, It Takes a Church to Raise a Christian: How the Community of God Transforms Lives, I cite some (favorite) Bono lyrics about spiritual searching (U2 is one of my favorite bands).  In many ways, he represents exactly the kind of Christian that many of us evangelicals actually endeavor to be: socially aware, compassionate to the downtrodden and outsider, prayerful and passionate, incredibly cool and deeply individualistic in faith.  When I read characters like the hero Neo, in Brian McClaren's (excellent!) novels, I can't help but see some of the similarities. 

Is this ultimately what it means to be "emergent"?  Does it mean that we are going to "emerge" from the church and create a faith of our own making, with the people of our own choosing, in the manner and time of our own doing? 

I am incredibly sympathetic to the Bonos and Neos of the world, indeed, my book was a challenge to make the church the kind of place that seekers need it to be--a representation of God in the world.  But if I read the New Testament correctly, we bother with the church because it is the ONLY body of Christ in the world--disappointments and all.

So, then what do we do to make the church more Bono-Neo friendly?  Hmmm...