A different Sunday morning mindset

[Guest]

I hear many people attack 'seeker friendly' churches and their sunday morning services.

I agree with many of the complaints

But maybe some of these pastors just have a different mindset. Maybe they are treating Sunday morning like the gatherings at the synagogues. Maybe they don't view their sunday morning service as a worship service, but as pre-evangelism.

Think about it.

Large portions of our society think going to church on sunday is part of being an american, even though many of them aren't really Christians. It makes all the sense in the world, to me, to gear the service towards them.

The building is just a building. Instead of viewing it as God's holy residence and declaring that a seeker sensitive service is an abomination, maybe we should view it as the building people go to on Sunday to learn something new.

We should be glad they invite Christians as the guest speaker each week.

Let the remnant come Sunday night, wednesday, etc, etc. Treat Sunday morning like a public gathering if that's what it is anyways.

[Guest]

You make a good point, just so long as the Sunday morning message does not misrepresent the terms of the Gospel, or lead people to think that they are saved when they are not. This strikes me as the primary danger of the seeker sensitive style of gathering.

[Guest]

After listening to Steve's series on the church and other bits in TNP broadcast, etc. I have become somewhat critical (or at least introspective) lately of the size and "seeker friendly" services and activities within our "mega" church. As we are still growing significantly, and spending a significant amount of money in the heart of a major metropolitan area now with multiple church campuses, I wonder what Steve would think of our church and the activities and "media" we use to attract visitors and keep people active in the church.

Being a "mega church" in a city with at least one other "mega church" the contrast between the two (and especially their teachings) does provide me a considerable degree of comfort even if the price of our real estate and trappings are extreme.

I would ask Steve to consider and discuss (preferably on air) faithful, biblical, non-compromising mega churches differently and even to spend some time in our church. It could stand some more "arminian" and "non-dispensational" influence, but even in that respect, the number and wide variety of highly qualified spirit-led bible teachers in our church speaks to the spirit's continued annointing (though we work hard to maintain orthodox teaching and prevent esoteric or heretic views, bible teachers vary on their teachings on dispensationalism, eternal security, and the like and are accepted even if pulpit teaching is largely one way or the other on a particular point, though rarely dogmatic on those types of issues). Also, while the activities and "format" of our primary "worship services" are designed to be comfortable and inviting, there is nothing purposefully "comfortable" about the message from the pulpit. It is never watered down, and my only criticism is that it is mostly evangelistic in messsage (odd criticism, I know) and I have begun getting less out of the message in worship than in our smaller bible study classes and "home groups" where even smaller groups of families congregate and fellowship outside the church service.

The real dilemma presented by Steve's message about church growth is what to do in a city of millions of people who want to follow Christ and see a church with both great teaching AND facilities for youth involvement and evangelistic opportunities through a church school and sports activities and the like. Plus, if folks are going to spend their money on sports clubs and athletic clubs and the like, or feel a need to exercise their artistic talents or musical gifts, why require them to buy Bally's memberships or get involved in a heathen theatrical group, etc. instead of providing a forum for their gifts to glorify the Lord ? If I see our message being diluted or gifts being abused, I will be the first to try and change it or leave. But, why not provide a variety of liturgical formats and styles within a given church to attract and keep a variety of folks as long as the message is the same throughout and not overshadowed. For youth, in particular, how is multimedia presentation (to which they are programmed to receive these days) any worse or less likely to "convey the message" than the worthless felt boards of noah's ark and the like in my own youth. I have seen spirit-led teens and young people in our church like no other even in the face of this "modern format."

To the point of the replier above, I do see our church services and church campus and media also not being strictly about congregational worship (though it is that) but also serving two other purposes -- first, a place for people to feel comfortable inviting co-workers, etc. second, a place for believers to trust that their children can enjoy things they tend to enjoy in a safe environment in a large city, and also a place with some conveniences in worship times and bible studies to accomodate the unfortunate pace and commuting realities in a large city. More than half of the growth of one of our new church campuses has been from people "coming back" or for the first time to church to play on a softball league, for example. That it took this to bring them in is unfortunate, but it did -- they are (in large part) committed followers of Christ, though there are surely a good number of merely professing believers or carnal Christians in the bunch (find me a church where that's not the case). That we have to evangelize the membership speaks to the problems raised by Steve, but at least they are being reached. Sometimes it takes people a while or even a lifetime to hear the Spirit calling. At least we keep doing so and provide an environment for them to serve and get involved on a deeper level through bible study, etc. once they do respond. You can continue going to our church services without the annointing of the spirit, but it would be tough to stay involved in our bible study and home groups as a "poser" for more than a little while. I am afraid this is the reality of the scope of reaching millions at home. Why go to the uttermost parts to reach a few if there are millions at home?

In our church, most of the long-time members see the bible study classes we have before or after the service as being a sort of "church within a church" or a mini-worship service with fellowship, a message, and often musical worship and breaking of bread where the true Church is grown among other like-minded groups of folks doing the same thing first on one campus and then on affiliated campuses. This is where we question our teachers, get to know them and influence their teaching, where they can direct their leadership to the needs of the group and teach to the needs -- where bread is broken together, children are raised together, where we provide meals when needs arise, do mission projects together, comfort in time of need, celebrate births, have men's and women's prayer groups, provide accountability to brothers and sisters in Christ -- in short -- let the Spirit work among us. The larger congregation serves a different purpose. We tend to measure the success of our church not in the size of the church worship service, but in the percentage of THOSE people who are actively involved in bible study. This is where people are likely to grow in Christ and become disciples and from which leadership comes. Though we are a wealthy church in large part in a wealthy part of a wealthy city, it is a pretty diverse membership (in financial position and race). Even though it is significantly professional, it is a place where the ditch digger can feel at home next to the investment banker (and where it may be difficult to determine which is which). We could do a better job embracing the truly least among us -- the dirty and uneducated, but I would say it is usually due their lack of comfort in the surroundings and not the welcome spirit of the brethren that causes them to leave. I have seen many come in and be embraced, invited to gatherings and the like only to leave professing (privately) their lack of comfort among professionals and educated as the reason. Being in leadership, I have known a bit more about their situations, however, and though it is painful to lose the opportunity to minister to them, mostly it is something else that drove them away -- usually their own hearts or preconceptions or life situations.

We have unique problems being in the heart of a major city -- if they want to come worship with us and can't, shouldn't we accommodate that? For example, we have studied our traffic problem and found that a significant number of people will circle the blocks several times, find no parking and leave (yet with room in the worship center). To answer that, we tried off-site parking for members (so-called evangelistic parking ministry). That worked to a point, but we ended up providing a Saturday evening service -- that is convenient to my family and work schedule, so we tried it and love it. Sunday mornings are a "zoo," and we find we can worship with less distractions in the Sat. evening service, which is also a bit less formal and as a result of its less traditional meeting time, tends to attract folks at a different point in their walk than Sunday morning. We then found that there were neighbors our members could better evangelize if their church weren't a one hour commute from the suburbs, so we rescued a "dead or dying" church in one suburban area and bought some property in a growing area where there was essentially no church presence other than Catholic and Mormon. Those have flourished with most joining on new profession of faith. Our traffic problem is again a problem, and we are faced with the only real option to purchase neighboring high-end retail space to put parking -- it's expensive, but the church is growing in all ways good, so why not use the God-given financial resources of a wealthy church membership to buy this property and convert it to parking and meeting space ?? The bottom line is why not grow in this environment where the Lord is continuing to work ?

The next step for our church is a bit non-traditional and is to move our doctrine and teaching and knowledge of how to reach the willing in metropolitan areas presently unserved or underserved by churches -- first by broadcasting our messages (youth and adult) into small growth campuses on (if you believe it) donated movie theaters in the Houston area and also cities such as New Orleans, Manhattan, San Francisco and other areas where neo-pagan or prosperity teaching is all they would otherwise get. These areas will have pastoral staff initially staffed by seminaries in the area, and as they grow, will be allowed to move into their own buildings, etc., recruit their own leadership, etc. Yes, there are people who will attend because it is "fun" or "contemporary" or otherwise, but more people have come to a strong and committed, spirit-filled, life changing faith in this environment than any of the small, sparse, dead churches I attended as a youth and left as an adolescent. I, personally, was fed intellectually in our church long enough to come back in spirit to the Lord and now serve faithfully and fervently with a fellowship of like-minded believers. I trust many of the other folks who come for the wrong reasons will likewise be met where they are by the service of our church.

If we didn't have such a commitment to the smaller units within the church, I would probably not be comfortable with the outreach and modern media methods, but ours is a mega-church consisting of smaller church-units on multiple campuses soon to be in multiple cities, all joined together with mutual resources and a common message/purpose. This is quite different from the other mega churches I'm familiar with which have little substance beyond their glitz and weekly "show" of a feel-good prosperity message.

Bottom line -- I, too, am critical or at least circumspect of the "mega church" movement. But, please don't put us all in one box.

[Guest]

Thanks for the good report. I have visited a couple of "seeker sensitive" churches in this area, and have been pleased with the quality and content of the sermons. I know God can use a large organization, if it is led by good men. E.M. Bounds always said, "The church is looking for better methods; God is looking for better men."

Good men of God can be used mightily, even in a very large, and, of necessity, organized church. Charles Spurgeon's church was certainly a "mega church" in the late nineteenth century, but he was uncompromising in his preaching. I think he baptized about 39,000 converts in his career, but he had very exacting standards for baptism, and made very sure that the candidate had a totally convincing testimony of conversion, and much evidence of true faith.

Calvary Chapel, under Chuck Smith, certainly became a "mega church" very early-on, but Chuck never compromised his message. I think his emphasis on end times is unbalanced, but he definitely brought many thousands of people to true faith in Christ.

I think the seeker sensitive movement has been around long enough to learn, in some cases, from the criticisms that have been leveled against it. My impression is that some of the leaders in that movement have cleaned-up their act considerably,. and are trying to be more biblical in their preaching and their objectives.

Your church sounds like a great one. I still have problems with all institutionalizing of the body of Christ, but such institutions are apparently here to stay, and I know God can use them. I don't expect to personally feel as comfortable in an institutional setting as in a more organic fellowship, but God is more versatile (and possibly, in this case) more broad-minded than me.

In my teaching, I am not wishing to be critical of specific groups, but of trends. I can even respect a minister who has succumbed to the trends I deplore, assuming he is a true and humble man of God. He needn't answer to me. God may well be more pleased with him than with me! Being "right" about everything is not what commends a man to God, but a broken and contrite spirit is highly valued by Him.

[Guest]

Does it please God to have Christmas tree's and the celebration of his birth at the church service. A pastor was using Leviticus 23 and 8th chapter of Neh 1-12 regarding JOY and celebration???? Come on am I the only weirdo who doesnt see the two as going together PLS HELP

[Guest]

Hi Believer, I'm kind of lost. Was the pastor saying that we should celebrate Christmas at church because of the celebration the Isrealites had in Nehemiah? That doesn't make much sense to me...

Personally I don't like Christmas very much. I find it to be the opposite of a season of joy. I'm glad that Jesus came to us, but I'm always grateful for that and I don't need a special time of year to remember it. Of course that's just me, and I know other people love this time of year and find a lot of joy in it. So what was your pastor trying to say, anyway?