Once again, I'm torn. I'm confused. I want answers!
Last month, the Administrative Council voted to start a 'contemporary' worship service on Saturday evenings. Being a fairly staunch traditionalist, I'm feeling quite a bit out of my league. So, as is my nature, I've started doing some research. I went to a psuedo-mega-church in the district on Saturday night to see how they do what they do. I've been speaking to other folks who have similar services to find out their approach to the service and the resources they use. I wish I could say it's helped. But not so much. On the surface, a 'contemporary' or 'current' service (and I really don't like those descriptors, but we use what we have) differs only in music style. But the more people I talk to, the less this seems to work.
This morning, I met with someone on the staff of the big church we went to Saturday night. After a fairly condescending lecture, we got to talking about their philosophy. He began by asking about the reactions we had to Saturday night's service (a group of us went to the church to find out more), which included liking the music, but the service feeling like a performance. He acknowledged the music comment, saying it's the most typical response. We didn't get back to the performance idea until later. He then admitted to me that performance was pretty much their goal. They are a seeker-oriented church, much in the style of Willow Creek. And their goal is to make the worship experience as a basic introduction to Church. Our discussions ranged further than just this topic, but on the whole, the conversation wasn't all that helpful. He didn't appear to have ever spent any time in a small church, which to be honest, limited what he could offer to me and my context. But I just can't get past the performance aspect.
There are many reasons why this is so. On theological levels, it limits the amount the congregation can participate in worship. When we went, aside from the two songs we sang at the beginning, we sat and watched for the rest of the service until it came time for Communion (which, to be fair, I was impressed that they actually did). The lights even dimmed when it came time for the sermon! Several of my seminary profs argued that we are formed as disciples in how we worship. If that's true, then the life of discipleship eminating from this kind of worship is one in which we sit on the sidelines and watch other folks do it for us.
On a practical level, where does all the hoopla end? If this style is what it takes to speak to this generation, then it severely limits who can participate, as far as churches go. We're starting this service and we don't have any live musicians. We can't afford the $5-$20 it takes to get the snazzy videos to show. When we get all the equipment necessary, which we already have some, what else will we have to get? My biggest question is, where, in all of the materialism and entertainment, is the Gospel?
But, on the opposite side of these and many other arguments I have, is the question of if not that, then what? The 'traditional' isn't working, either. Nearly 60-70% of my congregation is over the age of 70. The Bishop is all about adding professions of faith to the rolls and clergy are being watched to see how much we can 'produce' out of the declining and aging congregations we have. Who's right? The seminary profs who say that we're selling our soul or the performance-based churches who are filling their seats and bringing new people to Christ? Which is it? Is it an either-or question? Is there a middle ground? The guy I talked to today suggested not, or at least rebuffed my attempts to find it.
I'm really not sure how to go forward here or in which direction to lead the congregation.
5 comments:
As you indicated on my blog, it sounds like we are having a lot of the same issues. Thankfully, I don't have a chair of district that wants only to see numbers. The more I think about it, the more I really am starting to think that 'traditional' churches are not bad per se. The thinking behind it can be damaging, as it usually follows either the 'it's what we enjoy' line or the 'we've always done it that way' line. Of course, going the route of 'contemporary' because we think that is what 'works' can be just as damaging. Both seem to have as underlying suppositions that people will eventually come in (if we get the right minister, if we play the right music, etc.) and the rest can watch by the sidelines. To reach younger people and those with little or no connection to church, it really seems like we (i.e., the church as a whole) need to break out of the thought pattern we are in and for a group to try something completely different (not just tinkering with 'contemporary' services or even 'Fresh Expressions'). Something more along the lines of what the Emerging Church is trying to do.
Sarah,
Would doing something more discussion-based like "cafe church" where folks model community as they sit around tables work better for you/your congregation? I have many of the same questions as you do and also don't know the answers but still I thought I would throw in my 2 cents on what might be worth trying. Let us know how it works, whatever you do.
Blessings,
Mindy
There seems to be a prevailing notion that folks are just waiting for a "fun" church to appear and sweep them away from the doldrums of life and the lack of entertainment choices therein, be it on a Saturday night or whenever. I'm not sure if it was Erwin McManus or Brian McLaren who basically said the "If you build it, they will come" idea about seekers is complete bunk.
We had a similar incident trying to launch a Saturday night worship. I continually made the case to the group pushing for it that I did not see that folks were sitting around on Saturday nights bored ... they were doing what was already important to them. They were mad that I poo-poo'd the idea as essentially another gathering for "church nerds". That was what it was and no matter the angle, no significant (if any) unchurched, pre-Christian, seekers, etc. came. The team has since disbanded and is still upset about "failure".
I agree with a lot of what Will and Anonymous said about building community. Granted, I have no real idea how to do this, but I believe that down deep THAT is the hunger out there. I mean, Hollywood knows this, but is making a sham of it -- people paying $7-10 to sit next to each other in the dark in near silence for a couple of hours so they can emerge later and talk about a semi-shared, vicarious experience.
Yes, a change is needed, but I really don't think folks on the ground (church peeps) recognize the massive changes going around. I look at my peers and folks younger than I am and my heart breaks. Their lives have been handed to them in shreds and they have done some significant shredding themselves. I desperately want to see the power of God at work in their lives to bring healing and salvation; I desperately want to be a pastor that help create a place, time, space, etc. where those introductions to their savior and each other could happen.
God bless you in what you are doing. Don't ignore the Spirit testifying with your spirit. Keep pressing onto things greater and higher and purer. Know that you are in my prayers as you continue to discern and work through this worship matter.
I agree with you Sarah that there is a great disconnect between what we were taught in seminary and what is expected of us in the parish!
Is performance the answer? Hell no! What is then? Let me know when you find out. I can only say that I share your frustration and i think it has a lot to do with the way the UMC administers things. There are 11 Methodist Churches within a seven mile radius from my church--all with an attendance of less than 100!
We don't use our resources wisely--be they natural resources or our facilities/pastors. We need to merge several churches before they HAVE to close! Keep the pastors, lose a building or two. That might be something we could learn from the churches in England?
Sarah -
I am the author of the Gen-X Rising blog that you posted on in November (in regard to Bulldog's death). I no longer have your e-mail address, else I would just e-mail you. Someone with the North Carolina Annual Conference has contacted me to say that the Raleigh News & Observer wants to do a story about Bulldog and would like to contact you. If you still check this blog, could you e-mail me at the contact address listed on www.genxrising.com?
Thank you,
Andrew Thompson
Post a Comment