I spent much time Saturday writing a blog that says some things I really believe. Unfortunately, I also really believe that many who read it might find it offensive, and it would hurt, rather than help, the objective for which I wrote it. So I’m going to distill it, and see if it works better.
I’m writing for Evangelicals, so don’t be shocked if you “don’t get it” coming from somewhere other than Evangelicalism.
- I am a former Evangelical. I was on the conservative end of 1950s and 1960s Evangelicalism, which by today’s standards would be “Fundamentalist.”
- What I was taught at home and in the Evangelical Covenant Church of my childhood didn’t match what I was taught in a Wheaton-affiliated Evangelical boarding school in my adolescence; which didn’t match what I was taught at Wheaton College for 40 semester hours; which didn’t match what I was taught at John Brown University; which didn’t match what I was taught in IVCF and through InterVarsity Press when I went to Bradley University; which didn’t match what Campus Crusade was teaching when I dabbled over there; etc.
- Everyone claimed that their version was simply Biblical.
- Have you noticed, by the way, that all the Hal Lindsey/Late Great Planet Earth crap, very mainstream Evangelical, has proven to be false prophecy? The same fate awaits “Left Behind.”
- Seeing Evangelical disagreements (and extra-Biblical taboos and shibboleths) lowered my enthusiasm, but I knew nothing better than Evangelicalism and toughed it out.
- Through diligent reading, I stumbled onto Calvinism, which was better and brought back much of my enthusiasm. I then considered myself maybe sorta kinda a fringe Evangelical.
- Through dumb luck, I later stumbled onto Eastern Orthodoxy, where I’ve been for 14 years and I expect to die.
- Orthodoxy is the continuation of 1st millenium Christianity; it never adopted indulgences or the other stuff that led to the Protestant Reformation. Darn shame (and long story how) y’all didn’t come back to Orthodoxy then instead of starting new “churches.”
- I’m not alone in journeying to Orthodoxy.
- You’re a little old to become Orthodox because all the cool kids are doing it, aren’t you?
- You’re not too old to be uneasy with the contradictions and inherent foibles of Evangelicalism, and to go to a better, saner place, are you?
- You really don’t need the Sisiphean task of fighting Evangelical entropy, do you?
- If Evangelicalism isn’t based solely on the Bible, its boast and claim to fame (and disagreements among Evangelicals pretty well proves that it’s not), what is left of Evangelicalism?
- What good is it?
- How, if you know that returning to historic Christianity is an option, dare you not investigate in depth?
- If you are a disenthralled Evangelical, who is still is drawn to Jesus, you really need to look into Orthodoxy.
- You may say “Wow! This is it!”
- Likelier, you’ll say “Wow! This is kinda beautiful, but really strange.”
- If you say the latter, it’s only because you’ve been in historically strange worship for too long. (I believe that if some Christian were teleported from the first millenium to your Evangelical Church at 11 am Sunday, he would not know it was a Church. Nothing he expected from Church would be there.)
- If you’re still enthralled with Evangelicalism, God bless and have mercy on us both.
Suggestion: Put on your Sunday best, get out the Yellow Pages, and look for “Churches – Orthodox.” Do it today.
I guess that cleaned it up pretty well.
Tipsy Teetotaler ن 
My dear brother,
You write “Seeing Evangelical disagreements (and extra-Biblical taboos and shibboleths) lowered my enthusiasm.”
I have as you suggested investigated Eastern Orthodoxy. I find much to love and respect there, My discipleship and churchmanship have benefitted greatly from it, in my infuriatingly antinomian big tent Lutheran denomination. But (God forgive me) seeing Orthodox disagreements (and extra-Biblical taboos and shibboleths) lowered my enthusiasm.
My esteemed brother:
“Extrabiblical” is no intrinsic problem if you don’t claim, as does Evangelicalism, to be strictly Biblical. (Anti-Biblical is always a problem.) For following extrabiblical Tradition, we claim Biblical support (I Timothy 3:15; I Corinthians 11:16; II Thessalonians 2:15; II Timothy 1:1-2) I think you’re aware of that, though you disagree; I seem to recall our rejection of sola scriptura being an insurmountable hurdle for you when we were looking at Orthodoxy together in cyberspace circa 15 years ago.
Perhaps we’re thinking of different examples, but some things you may be thinking of as taboos or shibboleths may be mere guidelines or rhythms of the Church’s common life.
The disagreements I’ve encountered in Orthodoxy are (with rare and painful exceptions like Orthodox involvement in ecumenical discussions) irenic disagreements over matters where both sides would acknowledge that the matter is adiaphora or theologoumena. (Maybe I’ve led a sheltered life being so firmly attached to a single mission parish since Day 1.)
As the preceding paragraph may imply, Orthodoxy is not a very comfortable place for anyone who wants every question authoritatively answered; we apophatic folk know what’s false more often than we know exactly what’s cataphatically true. (This is not meant to say you are such a person, but to anticipate possible thoughts of gawkers.) Yup, in an ironic sense, we “Orthodox” (a word which tends to connote strictness and rigidity) are surprisingly flexible once we’re past some basics including the Creed and the cycle of services (which themselves teach and shape powerfully).
More could be said, but “disagreements,” “extra-Biblical,” “taboo” and “shibboleth” are all you brought up.
And although I have not looked closely at your big-tent Lutheran denomination, “antinomian” seems apt. The conflict between that infuriating feature and your catholic sensibility, including aversion to schism, can’t be easy to resolve.