Is “Fashionable” the Goal of the Church?

Timing is everything. I just finished reading an excellent book by Tullian Tchividjian called Unfashionable. He addresses the issue of how the church should interact with culture, specifically critiquing our fascination with “fitting in,” on in his terms, being “fashionable.” He does a remarkable job of showing how the church is supposed to be different from the world; not completely isolated from it, but different. Some good thoughtful stuff here.

Then on Sunday, the Springfield paper had a feature article called “Christian Ink.” It was highlighting a particular church in town that not only welcomes those who have tattoos, but actually has a wall in the church highlighting members who have been “inked.” A wall of fame, with pictures of their tats, welcomes all those who enter.

Now, I don’t want to turn this into an article strictly against tattoos, though I certainly think we can make some strong arguments against it. As a church, however, we ought to welcome anyone and everyone who comes, tats or not. So though I would strongly discourage getting them, we would certainly want to welcome folks who might have them. This isn’t really about that aspect of it.

The article tells how the pastor of this church preached a sermon while getting a tattoo, and offering “temporary tats” to everyone at the same time. I’m thinking, what’s the point here? Is this really what the preaching of this Gospel is supposed to be about? Isn’t this the very “fashionable” approach Tchividjian is talking about? Just trying to look like the world, to be hip, to fit in and so on.

Furthermore, the article highlights one man who owns or co-owns two tattoo parlors in the area with “sanctified” sounding names like Eternal Tattoo and Sacred Art. I don’t know this man. I don’t know his business ventures. But I am greatly disturbed by this comment from the article:

“(the owner) sees his art as a way to earn a living and a way to share his faith. ‘I thought if someone out there needed to hear what the Bible says, maybe I was that guy to reach them,’ he says. But his own faith does not get in the way of business. The artists in the shops will talk to a customer who requests an offensive tattoo, but they will not refuse one based on beliefs. ‘I do lots of Wiccan tattoos,’ says…a tattoo artist at Eternal.” (emphasis mine)

Does anyone else see the problem here? Don’t let you faith get in the way of business? Go ahead a put a permanent Wiccan mark on someone’s body, it’s ok? That’s like me saying to someone, “I don’t recommend Satanic books, but if you really want one, here let me give you one.” Hel-lo!

Furthermore, one of the featured “converts” in this article who came to the church I mentioned above because of it’s openness on the issue, posed for photos to accompany the article. On his forearm is a skull and crossbones and a scantily clad woman. One shot has his inked arms crossed, with a cross in his hand hanging right next to the tattoo.

Now, please hear me again. The church ought to be reaching out to folks like this. They need the Gospel just like the rest of us sinners. And I don’t want to disparaged what God may be doing in his life. But do we not see the problem with “accepting” artwork that is in opposition to Biblical standards; in fact, not just accepting but showing them off like some kind of badge of honor, when it is an offense to the holiness our God calls us to? Are we so enamored by the world, that we can’t even see the worldliness of stuff like this?

Again, I understand the man got the tats prior to “conversion” (at least that’s the assumption I make), and that’s something he’ll have to live with. But instead of encouraging him to maybe have the more offensive tats removed or at least covered, we’re going to show them off on the wall at church, along with the rest of our members’ “art”? We’re going to brag about permanently marking people’s bodies with Satanic symbols, and we don’t have a problem with that because we don’t want our faith to affect our business?

I may have read the book wrong, but this is precisely the kind of thing Tchividjian was talking about. Our failure to let our faith affect every area of our lives so that we live differently from the world around us. Not haughtily. Not judgmentally. Not in isolation from the world. But different. We are a new creation in Christ, the old is gone, the new has come. We must be in the world, but not of it. As Tchividjian says, “against the world, for the world.” Opposing the world system for the benefit of the world, seeking its redemption.

We will never have the influence we are meant to have in this world until we learn to live “unfashionably.” Until we learn to see that worldliness makes us enemies of God. Until we are willing to let our faith affect our business, and our families, and our lifestyle, and so on.

But as long as the church works so hard to look just like the world, the world isn’t going to see anything in the church worth having. Let’s remember that we are citizens of a different Kingdom, messengers of a better way and a better King to serve. And let’s faithfully engage those around us with the Gospel without cheapening it through worldly imitations of what’s hip and cool.


(Note: Thanks to Phil Johnson of the Spurgeon Archive and the Pyromaniacs site for the images. If you appreciate the satire, there are lots more where those came from HERE.)