I thank God for the kind of "Bible Belt Religion" that introduced me to Jesus. Our little church couldn’t boast a single scholar who had been educated beyond both his intelligence and his usefulness. We just had a houseful of simple people who simply loved the Lord.

Were there doctrinal problems? More than you could shake a stick at. But there was also an unvarnished devotion to the two Great Commandments. And such love covers a multitude of catechetical misfires.

The pastors of my childhood dangled their participles, misplaced modifiers, and would’ve probably preached against the premarital conjugation of verbs. But they also proclaimed a God too big to fail, too wise to make a mistake, and too loving to let you go.

Back then we prayed in public and sinned in secret. This is the much maligned “Bible Belt” decorum. We weren’t perfect, but we made few claims to such lofty ideals. We believed in repentance--mostly because we were used to doing so much of it.

Today we are told that backward, small-town, southern religion created a disproportionate number of “nominal” Christians. I reckon that’s probably true since it has made more of the other kind of Christian than anyone else too. Want to trade missionary receipts?

So what if Bible Belt religion has resulted in some cultural Christianity? Urban Evangelistas love to rail against nominal religion, declaring with no small amount of glee, “Mayberry is not the New Jerusalem.” Ok then. But Mayberry sure as hell ain’t Sodom and Gomorrah either.

Anyone who ever had a widow teach them about David from a lint-laden flannelgraph; or learned the “Romans Road” from a mechanic during VBS; or was otherwise loved to Jesus by hard-working people with southern accents should give thanks to the Good Lord for Bible Belt Religion.