Who would’ve thought that a kid from the Midwest would be on the cutting edge of cool? Okay, so “kid” and “cutting edge” are negotiable. Brett McCracken and I crossed paths (in the cyber sense) when he was then senior editor of Relevant Magazine‘s Progressive Culture section and he accepted 
my essay Let Us Decompose. Since then Brett’s moved to SoCal, received a masters degree in cinema and media studies at UCLA, started blogging, and this week releases his first book Hipster Christianity: When Church and Cool Collide. Brett’s one of my favorite bloggers and agreed to answer a few of my questions regarding his fascinating new book. He would not, however, validate my hipster cred.
Anyway, as an added bonus, I have three (3) signed copies of Hipster Christianity I’ll be giving away at the end of this week. If you’d like to be entered into the drawing for one of these copies, just leave a comment on this post… and, please, comment about something actually in the post! Thursday midnight will be the deadline. I’ll announce winners on Friday. And thanks again, Brett, for a terrific book and a thoughtful interview.
* * *
MIKE: Brett, exactly what is “Hipster Christianity”?
BRETT: Hipster Christianity is, in short, the fusion of hipster culture—independent, alternative, anti-mainstream, fashionable—with Christianity. It’s a world of mostly twentysomething Christian evangelicals who grew up on CCM and hysteria about being in the “end times,” but now care more about things like social justice, creation care, and whiskey tasting. It’s a world where things like Left Behind, Jesus fish bumper stickers, and door-to-door evangelism are relevant only as a source of irony or nostalgia. It’s a world where Braveheart youth pastor analogies and Thomas Kinkade are anathema. Hipster Christianity is about rebelling against the legalistic, overly political, apathetic-about-culture evangelicalism of the latter half of the 20th century. It’s a new iteration of youth-oriented, alternative, countercultural Christianity—the offspring of the Jesus movement of the 60s-70s but less Pentecostal and more liturgical (in a “postmodern pastiche” sort of way).
MIKE: To many people, the term “Hipster Christianity” probably seems like an oxymoron. Is it? Can “cool” and “Christianity” really co-exist?
BRETT: I think they can co-exist, and do. If “hipster Christianity” wasn’t a real, widespread thing there’s no way a book could have been written about it. I didn’t make things up in the book. It’s all reporting on a real phenomenon.
That said, I think we then have to question whether cool and Christianity should co-exist. That’s really the question my book is asking (especially the latter third of it). What happens to Christianity when it becomes cool? What 
are the paradoxes of this fusion? Can we follow both Christ AND cool? It’d definitely not a natural fit.
MIKE: The Christian hipster seems to be defined by many surface elements – fashion, music, literature, food, aesthetics, etc. But what are the philosophical and/or religious convictions that shape the Christian hipster? Do Christian hipsters fit more naturally within a specific denomination or theological system?
BRETT: That’s a great question. I think philosophy/theology definitely does help shape the Christian hipster culture. Typically they gravitate toward the old (the church fathers, Thomas a Kempis, Teresa of Avila) or anything mystical or spiritual-formation oriented (Evelyn Underhill, A.W. Tozer, Henri Nouwen). Some of them like Christian existentialism (Tililch, Bultmann), while others of them like Reformed and Puritan theology (Calvin, Luther, Jonathan Edwards). One unifying theological conviction for Christian hipsters seems to be a more covenantal eschatology that looks to a new creation and the redemption of the earth (rather than an “it’s all gonna burn” perspective”). Most of them also tend to view community as an important, oft-neglected aspect of the Christian life. They are less inclined to speak in individualistic salvation terms (“winning souls”) and hardly ever talk about where one goes after they die. They hate the idea that converting to Christianity is merely a “ticket” to heaven or a get out of hell card. They’d prefer to view the gospel in terms of its restoring powers for all creation (including, but not limited to individuals).
MIKE: One writer to Andrew Sullivan’s Daily Dish described a Christian hipster as, “a person who both believes in Christ and explores the world for themselves, rather than taking their Pastor/Mother/Father/Dobson’s opinion as unquestionable.” Any truth to that perspective? And if so, couldn’t this simply be a sanctified imitation of the 60’s counter-culture?
BRETT: Yeah, I think that’s a fair assessment. And yeah, it definitely has echoes of the 60s counterculture. Youth are always going to want to rebel and define themselves outside of their parents’ milieu. Christian hipsters are just like any other generation of hippies, slackers, hipsters, etc. They are trying to understand the world in a new way, channeling that “I know best!” hubris of youth into the ways they express themselves visually and ideologically. The problem is that they usually throw out a lot of good things when they holistically dismiss the worlds of the authority structures they grew up with. Sure, there is a lot in the pastor/parents/Dobson world that needs to be abandoned and critiqued, but there is also quite a bit in the new hipster world that needs to be critiqued.
MIKE: Bashing the Evangelical Church seems to be en vogue these days. A lot of people hate on mainstream American Christians. At first glance, Christian hipsters seem to share that sentiment. Do they?
BRETT: Certainly some of them do, but more and more I’m thinking that the biggest “haters” of mainstream American Christianity are the baby boomer 
pastors and authors (the Emergent leaders, Brian McLaren, various other “hip” pastors) who assume that no kid in their right mind would be attracted to Christianity unless it is revamped and distanced from its various negative evangelical connotations. All these books coming out about “Hate the Christian, Love the Church,” or “Don’t Worry, I’m a Christ-Follower Not a Christian,” are just silly to me… and I suspect most younger Christians find this whole “bending over backward to apologize for how bad some Christians have been” is unnecessary and somewhat desperate.
MIKE: So what can mainstream Evangelicals learn from Christian hipsters?
BRETT: I think there are several things mainstream evangelicals can learn from Christian hipsters. They can learn to care more about art and culture, for instance. Christian hipsters have a healthy (I think) love of “good things.” They value aesthetics and they appreciate well-made things (whether music, food, beer, etc). They seem to genuinely appreciate God’s creation and are curious and awestruck by it, which is something I sometimes think mainstream evangelicalism is lacking. Also, I think the hipster emphases on social justice, caring for the environment, and generally being engaged in world issues can offer some helpful lessons for mainstream evangelicalism.
MIKE: Rod Dreher at Crunchy Con quoted at length from your post “Are You a Christian Hipster,” and concluded, “Rather than the superficial term ‘hipster,’ the more meaningful term for Christians of any tradition is ‘radical.’ A hipster is just playing at being radical.” First, do you think Dreher’s right? If so, can a “radical” posture ultimately bring about the type of change to Evangelical subculture that hipsters want?
BRETT: I always find it funny when hipsterdom is equated with radicalism. In all but the rarest of cases, hipsters are anything but radical. They are as consumer-minded as their capitalism foils, as insulated and bourgeois as their suburban foes, and about as revolutionizing for culture as a Segway was for transportation. Sure, they like to romanticize radicalism and revolution, but are they doing anything truly radical? It’s one thing to have this posture; it’s another to actually be living in a radical way. Shane Claiborne is a true radical. But so are some soccer moms and business men. Wearing Che Guevera shirts, riding fixed gear bikes, and eating community-grown vegetables isn’t really radical.
MIKE: This is your first book. For all my writer friends, can you describe the nuts and bolts of how it came about. Did you acquire an agent, were you approached by a potential publisher, or did you have to “pound the pavement” to sell the idea to others?
BRETT: Baker Books was the first publisher I pitched it to, and it came about from a personal connection who put in a good word for me with the acquisitions editor. I sent him an email with the idea for a book about “cool Christianity,” he had me write a full proposal and a sample chapter, and eventually they acquired it and I signed the contract. No agent involved (though I did consult a few agents for some free advice along the way). I think in this case, what appealed to Baker was that it was a timely idea that I had already written about and thought about (it helped that they could read blog posts and articles, such as Relevant’s “A New Kind of Hipster,” that I had written on the topic). I would suggest that if you’re an aspiring author and you don’t have a blog, start one. Also, try to publish articles on the topic of the book. Show that it’s an idea with proven interest for readers.
MIKE: Is “Hipster Christianity” aimed at defining a growing subculture or informing an aging culture? Since hipsters hate labels, I’m assuming you believe that most hipsters won’t be reading your book. Should they? And if us “non-hipsters” are your target audience, why should the hipster culture be important to us? In other words, who should read “Hipster Christianity”?
BRETT: Both. I wanted the book to be a historical time capsule on one hand, and a cautionary tale critique on the other. I wrote it for a broad audience, and I think anyone with an interest in Christian culture (both hipsters and non hipsters) will find it interesting. I definitely had pastors in mind, or youth pastors or just leaders in Christianity… people who are especially concerned with the question of how to make Christianity appealing to the culture and whether or not we should try to make Christianity “cool.” I think Christian hipsters themselves should read it. If they like self-referentiality and thinking deeply about sociology and culture as much as I think they do, they will find much of interest in this book.
MIKE: Finally, what do you think will eventually come of hipster Christianity? Is it a fad? Or do you see some staying power to its idea and aims?
BRETT: I think it will be around for a bit longer, though it’s always changing. I think the nature of it being first and foremost a rebellion against a certain form of 80s-90s evangelicalism means that once this generation grows up, that need to rebel will gradually wane. I’m sure the current set of Christian hipsters will have kids that will find new ways to rebel. Who knows what that will look like.
* * *
And all this time I thought eating free-range chicken and owning a Che Guevera shirt made me a radical. Oh well. Really, Brett, great stuff. Congratulations and good luck on the book. And remember, if any of you’d like to be entered into the giveaway for one of three signed copies of Hipster Christianity, just leave a comment on this post.
Really, appears to be nothing new under the sun here. Hipster Christianity seems to be the current generation take on “what do I believe and how do I live my life.” That said, sure, I’d read the book.
I live in Portland, a city that seems to think it is the very embodiment of hipsterdom. That being said, the pendulum now seems to be slowly swinging the other way–I know hipsters who are now complaining about hipsters.
For this specific reason–the fact that, from where I sit, “hipster-ness” seems to be more about what’s wrong around us than what’s right–I bristled at the title of the book. Some people might describe me exactly as the author does hipster Christians–a fact which made me bristle more.
But then I read this sentence: “Wearing Che Guevera shirts, riding fixed gear bikes, and eating community-grown vegetables isn’t really radical.”, and now I want to read the book. And send Portland the memo. The Che Guevara shirts are fading out of style, but the rest is hanging on…
I grew up in Portland, so I just have to laugh. What is it with Portland and hipsters? But, seriously, my husband and I graduated from Portland Christian high school in ’91, and nearly all of our classmates would have fit this guy’s definition of ‘hipster Christianity’ way back then at the cusp of the nineties. I, too, want to read the book. I don’t know if it will make me laugh or cry (because I miss some of those hipster ways, and I never thought I would!) 🙂
I know one person in this movement, though he might disagree. Our conversations have shaped me and opened my eyes to a world where redemption and community matter more than altar calls and Sunday church. It definitely seems faddish, but also necessary, as each movement has it’s own blinders and each successive movement seeks to remove the blinders from its predecessor.
Shane Claiborne is an excellent example of a radical. Another one would be Brandt Russo.
interesting stuff.
I’d like to echo Dan’s comment. It’s just another generation within the church defining their spirituality — just as evangelicalism was a response to the fundamentalism in the earlier part of the 20th century.
It has its strengths and weaknesses, although the whole “Christ-follower” thing instead of “Christian” is pedantic. Do they think they’re fooling anyone?
This is an interesting book, but I am wondering if it is only going to be preaching to the choir?
Looks good though. I will enjoy reading it soon.
Very interesting. I think there’s some truth in what he says, which I see in myself and others around my age.
For me personally, I’m more “theologically convinced” about things, so while I do see the need to remedy the way American culture has negatively impacted the church and while I do feel that we need to be more community-based (I believe the metaphor is a of a cafeteria line opposed to a potluck,) my rejection of things like dispensationalism has very little to do with rebelling against what mommy and daddy had drilled into me every Sunday until I found myself at nineteen, because, well, mommy and daddy only took me to church about five times, including my christening and first communion.
To be completely honest, and I hate to sound overly-cynical because I think there’s a lot of good to changing what we assume outright to be “the way things are,” it seems like a lot of these people are trying too hard. I believe the motivation for any thought or action should ultimately be truth, not adherence to the bullet points of a subculture. A “whiskey tasting” is laughable to me, not because I believe drinking alcohol is sin, but because I would feel more melodramatic than something out of Twilight. If that’s what floats your boat, though, by all means.
I do want a faith that focuses on community. I also want a theology I can be convinced of. But I don’t want to arbitrarily rebel against anything. The fact of the matter is I wouldn’t be a believer if it wasn’t for the “megachurch” I used to go to. I think the megachurch, in all it’s failings, does cater to a certain demographic of (mostly) baby-boomer people. My generation needs to make some changes to feel good about itself; fine. I don’t think any of us should be surprised when our kids (if the Lord doesn’t return) want something different than what we at this moment think is the bees knees.
All of that cynicism is, again, not to say the emerging church or whatever it’s being called nowadays doesn’t have some legitimate points. Ultimately I think our worldview should be biblical, not culturally relative (recognizing the need for malleability, of course) and if we were to be honest with ourselves, we would see that there is good in the megachurch culture as well as in the hipster culture, but there is also bad in both.
I don’t aim to step on toes, but I’m gonna’ do what I’m gonna’ do. Dig?
I’m curious how hipster Christianity differs from the emerging movement. I guess I assumed hipster was a subset of emergent.
I understand that there is a backlash against the “Churchianity” culture of the 80’s and 90’s, the alternative world bubble that mirrors mainstream culture except without cussing, alcohol consumption, and sex outside of marriage (except for the occasional prodigal who repents). Still, the descriptions here make hipster Christianity sound fairly superficial.
So Brett, where do you fall? Hip or square? 😉
While reading the interview, I wondered the same thing. ‘Hipster’ started sounding ‘Emergent’ to me, which is a turn off.
As for being ‘rebellious’ and ‘hippy-ish’, that’s sort of silly to me. I’ve thought through this myself, as a alterna-generation-x’er.
Christ was rebellious in that he didn’t follow the ways of this world. Being a Christian and following Christ is a rebellion of sorts. The world thinks it’s cool to self-destruct these days. As a Christian, I think it’s cool to embrace healing and growth. In order to do that, I go against the ways of the world every day. I eat my ezekiel bread while the world around me eats the Standard American Diet. They think I’m weird. I prefer to call myself a rebel. 🙂
As for the hippy part, if we follow the Bible, we will naturally be hippy-ish. It calls us to be good stewards of the land. It also calls us to appreciate God’s gifts, a.k.a. the finer things.
Point is…who needs a movement. Why don’t we just concentrate on conducting ourselves according to the Bible. That in itself is hip and cool.
Christianity not cool? Hmmmmmm….personally, things like redemption, hope, faith, love, healing, restoration, forgiveness, community, new life, new beginning, etc. all seem pretty cool to me.
Several of you have commented on how Brett’s book — or the hipster culture, to be more exact — sounds suspiciously emergent. Readers of this blog know how much I wrestle with emergent ideology. However, “Hipster Christianity” is not an endorsement of emergent theology, nor a rebuttal. Rather, it is an exposé of a growing demographic w/in Christendom. In fact, I think Brett gives a very balanced, reasoned, “orthodox” response to Christian hipsterism, some of which speaks to emergent theology.
“And all this time I thought eating free-range chicken and owning a Che Guevera shirt made me a radical.”
The same thoughts I had before reading Brett’s stuff…I thought I was the only cool Christian!!! Dangit!!!
I’m surprised no one has mentioned labeling yet. As far as I understand it hipsters never admit to being hipsters. For me, the definition McCracken gives, at least in this interview, is far too broad. Anyone remotely trendy twenty-something is a hipster.
It is interesting how so many Churches now are advertising how they are relevant, which in my opinion automatically disqualifies them. And how so many hip, fringe Churches are becoming the new megachurches for our generation.
I am very interested what discussions this book might bring up. From a few quotes from facebook, it seems like a wonderful and timely follow-up to all of the “emergent” discussions and deconstruction of the last ten or so years.
I, for one, am eager to read the book. To me it seems like every stripe of Xianity has their own definition of “cool”, not just the hipster variety. The more I see how different churches are in their style of worship/preaching/community life, the more I believe that this diversity of “cool” is a good thing. Everyone should feel like they are “in on something good” at their church. Some people are drawn to the Christ found in loud music in a warehouse, others to the Christ of a quiet mediation in a cathedral. For some churches “cool” is a focus on healing via miracles, for others “cool” is a focus on healing via social justice. If Christ is present in it then it’s going to be good, regardless of how many people have deemed it cool.
I love following McCraken’s blog. Nothing fascinates me more than seeing hipsters define coolness and individuality by creating a whole new conformity. Looking forward to the book.
Sounds great… thanks for posting this. It all seems a bit strange how we adults still buy into ideas like “being cool”.
It seems that hipster Christianity has three prongs, the first two of which are legitimate and needed: 1. a less religious and more wholistic view of Christian faith (social justice, creation care, non-dualistic embrace of all things beautiful); 2. a missional impulse toward correcting the embarrassingly negative perceptions of Christians (the ones that shouldn’t describe us… hateful, judgmental, etc.); 3. looking sexy doing it.
I’m interested to know why this movement is being seen as “less Pentecostal and more liturgical” because while being a Pentecostal Christian I’ve seen just as much of a push in the hipster direction as seen in the “Emergent” churches or non-Pentecostal churches. In my experience, the “Pentecostal hipster” attempts to peel away the sensational aspects of their convictions in an attempt to be more “in tune” with God and not just when the choir changes keys.
This is fascinating. I just stumbled across this book today, which apparently suits me well since this is the first day it is available. I am a twenty-something in college studying religion (from a global perspective), and this is truly relevant. I see so much of what was summed up in this interview being viable and actual reality. Now that there is an apparent term for this type of person, I consider myself a Christian Hipster. From having a very conservative background and than finding my own take on Christianity through my studies is university, I see an evolution of thought within my generation. This blows me away because I was not aware that this was a huge ideology that was being exposed and created, but now that someone has mentioned it, I can definitely see this happening even within my friend-group on campus which is comprised of Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Daoists, Atheists, etc. There seems to be a gravitation towards philosophy and theology instead of just whatever is literally evident. As a Christian, obviously I can see from an insider’s perspective, but I think this is happening on a global level in every religion – some a little less progressive then others, but none-the-less, still happening. I cannot get over how interesting this is…
I was talking with my husband the other day and we were discussing how we both grew up in a conservative (SBC) church and that now we are at a very progressive church where he is on staff. At first it was a rough transition because the style of the worship service was more liturgical and the church actually preached on social justice at least 10 times a year. We had never experienced that in our background, but we have changed our preference of worship into a more, like you said above, liturgical with more of an emphasis on philosophical and theology and art and passion and a less emphasis on “burning fires of hell” and having your “ticket” of salvation. Personally, I buy into a more Christianity and less of a legalistic Christianity and I think this is the trend – those who may have never been given the choices on important topics.
I also think, last thought, that the global awareness has had something to do with this because it’s no longer, “us” and everyone else, it’s kind of a “we’re all in this together” feeling now, which would lend itself towards more of a social perspective and caring less about the “rules” and more about the individual person.
Very interesting. Thank you for this!!
The pursuit of “coolness” is definitely nothing new, but I think the hipster approach is attractive to many young Christians because it’s a way they can fit in without going against their beliefs, but even express their beliefs. And that’s often not something they grew up with.
Many of us who grew up as church kids have had a lot of the Christian bubble around us – CCM music, message t-shirts, WWJD tchochkes, etc. Those cultural markers were just as much about striving for a certain kind of coolness, but they seemed phony and manipulative as a method of evangelism and the coolness definitely didn’t work either, especially when you take it out of the subculture.
There are certainly plenty of cynical, bitter hipsters. But there’s also a kind of whimsicality and humor in the “movement” (if it qualifies as such) that allows for both irony and affection for the Christian culture they grew up in that they may have moved on from. Yet it still leaves space for an idealism that strives for integration and authenticity.
I went to school with Brett at Wheaton College and graduated in the same class. I haven’t read his book yet, of course, but most of what I’ve seen so far (on the website for the book and facebook) seems extremely accurate to the cohort of evangelical young adults I know from that school. But I see less of this “movement” happening through the Moody Bible Institute grads in Chicago I know.
I don’t mean to denigrate MBI alums in any way – but people who are part of the traditional map to Christian ministry are still often not exposed to the kinds of disciplines and questions that come through the liberal arts education. The interests are different and the attitude is often very different too – less irony and art, more sincerity and traditional programs.
I hear a lot of stereotypes about evangelicalism coming from some Wheaton grads that doesn’t match up with my experience growing up in Chicago in a series of working-class churches that were strongly connected to institutions like Moody and AWANA. There are still a lot of church kids happily continuing in that tradition who may have some of the tshirts and bikes but probably don’t care as much about the social issues or music.
I like that.
“I think the hipster approach is attractive to many young Christians because it’s a way they can fit in without going against their beliefs, but even express their beliefs.”
I’ve experienced that. The hipster culture (whether real or merely a pretense) of “I could care less what you think of me.” does make it easier for a person embrace their beliefs in a public way.
I just thought I’d add…as one who did not grow up in the church, but came into it during my early twenties, I find the Christian tendency to analyze “movements” and to constantly self-evaluate, re-evaluate a bit odd. I think since I didn’t grow up going to church, I’ll always feel a bit of an outsider, looking in, trying to figure out the “church” thing. I understand the need to refine our philosophies and theologies (or rather, to constantly check ourselves and our thoughts against scripture to see if we are going too far astray), but as far as defining cultural movements and all within Christianity itself…hmmm…I’m undecided on this. Does Christ want us to spend our time ruminating about this sort of thing? That’s not a judgement. It’s a question that’s been rolling around in my head lately. I haven’t answered it for myself yet.
I’m very interested in reading the book. My husband and I have been discussing all of these things for some time as we’ve been trying to find a church to attend. As early 30-somethings who never quite bought a lot of the Christian sub-culture we were raised with, we’ve struggled to find a balance between being a part of the church and rejecting things we felt didn’t ring true. We’ve also found it difficult to find people who love the arts and care about world issues, but who also care about real church fellowship and seeking out good teaching. As much as we’ve seen insincerity from our parents’ churches, we now see a pseudo-intellectual trend in this “hipsterish” movement. We still run into a lot of church people that don’t seem genuine, only instead of being super-conservative Christian bubble types, they are trying to act as if they love museums and the environment.
I loved the exchange you guys had about being radical, and how hipsters “are just playing at being radical.” Brett is right, “They are as consumer-minded as their capitalism foils, as insulated and bourgeois as their suburban foes, and about as revolutionizing for culture as a Segway was for transportation … Shane Claiborne is a true radical. But so are some soccer moms and business men. Wearing Che Guevera shirts, riding fixed gear bikes, and eating community-grown vegetables isn’t really radical.”
I think far too many Christians want to easily fit into a demographic or trend, and they chase after it more than they are truly concerned about trying to live as God would have them live. If it weren’t so sad, some of these fads would be funny. And ironically, because it’s just another way of being trendy, it’s still not cool to the rest of the world. An awful lot of these people are only really cool within their group of friends.
I am interested about the whole idea of labeling. Many Churches these days are advertising that they are “relevant.” Which seems to automatically disqualify them. It will be interesting to see if these hip Churches on the fringes end up being the next megachurches.
I sincerely hope that this book adds to the much needed discussion after these last ten or so years of all this deconstruction and emergent theology that seems to have coincided with the rise and fall of the Evangelical Right.
Oops looks like I accidentally posted twice because my last post took awhile to appear. My apologies
Thank you for this post. It was great to hear a dialogue on a book I can’t wait to read (and hopefully win!). This type of thinking/dialogue/conversation is what is missing in much of the mainstream Christianity that I feels would dismiss the basis of this book. I especially like the scope in which Brett hopes to reach, both those that label themselves as part Hipster and those that don’t. I agree entirely with Brett – all Christian leaders need to read this book because they need to know what our generation is yearning for. We want Christ in the most desperate way, but we want Him without the baggage the previous few generations have added to Him. Thanks for this interview, and in advance, thanks for the signed copy.
Andrew
I’ve seen mention of some commenters saying something to the effect of, “How could redemption not be ‘cool’?” I think Brett, and this book as a whole, is not saying that any of these things are not ‘cool’ by downplaying how amazing the grace of Christ is to die for us while we were yet sinners, but rather he is saying that to the culture as a whole, we need not convince them to follow Jesus because it is the ‘cool’ thing to do. The ‘cool’ thing meaning we have coffee shops in our church that are better than Starbucks so you should come to our church, or our worship music is better than the Arcade Fire so you must come to our gathering, or we use new terms to explain old, old things such as ‘gathering’ for worship service, and ‘community spiritual leader’ instead of pastor.
Ultimately, and I believe Brett hits on this in his book, what we make as ultimate in our hearts is what defines what we worship. If we think we need to be cool in order to reach unbelievers, we will worship being cool. But if we think that God and His grace are the only things we need, we will worship and pursue after God first and foremost. Hipster Christianity is great if the overarching message coming out of it is that hipsters want “to worship God and glorify Him forever” through their lifestyle choices.
Soli deo gloria.