Conservative Churches Focused on Right Belief and Wrong Behavior

Augustine’s great quote is, “Love God and do as you please.” The key to that quote is love God first, in the same way, behavior driven by passion for God is different than behavior driven by belief systems based on the rules. During the first half of the 20th century another den of iniquity sprang up in towns everywhere, i.e. the movie theater. Conservative church leaders regarded any behavior associated with saloons or movie theaters as evil. This led to an interesting paradox. What lay Christians did in ministry wasn’t very important, but what they did, or more precisely, what they didn’t do, in their social lives was very important.

Conservative Christians isolated themselves. They separated from other Christians because of what the other Christians believed. And they separated from non Christians because of how non-Christians behaved. My friend and co-author remembers the struggle that he had as a new Christian, when he was offered a glass of wine while visiting in the home of a French family. He wanted to share my Christian testimony with this gracious family, and he didn’t want to offend them. But, he also didn’t want to offend his conservative Christian friends. Fundamentalism created a behavioral dilemma for me as a young Christian; a dilemma that I soon learned is supported by neither scripture nor Christian tradition.

Interest in the personal ministry callings of the church’s lay people languished during the four decades of the Liberal/Fundamentalist Controversies. It is true that liberal churches remained more committed to social action than did conservative churches. Liberal pastors were more likely to make Social Action pronouncements from their pulpits than were conservative pastors. As a result, there were more liberal Christians than conservative Christians, marching for civil rights. But neither liberals nor conservatives were likely to get involved in personal ministry to the new emerging people groups.

In both liberal and conservative churches it was largely the religious professionals who ministered with passion. In conservative churches the professionals were armed with the necessary theological weapons needed to fight the heresy battles. And in the liberal churches the professionals were armed with the sociological awareness necessary to direct the masses to the appropriate places of social protest.

During the period of Church History dominated by the Liberal/Fundamentalist Controversies, 1925-1965, lay people were forced into both passive church ministry roles and isolated lifestyles. It was important that only those who really understood their church’s theological distinctives be able to exert influence in the church. Therefore lay people expected their leaders to be professionally trained and passionately committed to both their church’s distinctives and social lifestyle. After all the clergy was paid to be knowledgeable and passionate.

Lay people, on the other hand, were not expected to be passionate about their personal call to ministry. But, they were expected supportive of their leaders through regular attendance and financial support, (nickels and noses). And in conservative churches they were expected to separate themselves from the world; which meant no cards, dancing, listening to Elvis or, God forbid, watch him shake his pelvis in the movies. Churches successfully structured themselves so that their people could only travel within “gated communities.”