On a lighter note...share something a church you attend, minister at, or even heard of that has done something out-of-the-box and unique for the Easter holiday.
At my particular church, we have a balcony that surrounds the lobby as you walk in. In years past, we have had an orchestra up there so the lobby is filled with beautiful music as you walk in. Quite a nice touch!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
It had to be James River today. They played Phil Wickhams amazing "True Love" song (If you haven't heard it you need to, .99 cents on itunes) and had a guy paint on the stage using only his fingers and black paint the image of Christ on the cross. It was like a grown up fingerpainting but that song + painting was a very powerful image/song/worship experience/ reactionary slip of tongues/ all combined in one glorious moment.
uh oh, am I sounding post-modern?
Matt<><
North Point did something similar, but they had a sand artist doing stuff on a light table to open the service. It was interesting. He did a bunch of different images but then ended with the garden scene becoming Christ on the cross.
Also when people exited the auditorium they gave away plastic eggs with numbers in them for a chance to win various stuff. Church paraphernalia, a playstation III, and an IPhone are a few of the ones I remember, but people have to come back next week to see if they won, which will hopefully get some of the visitors to come back for another opportunity to connect with Christ.
nothing like a chance at free self-centered technology to get people to love Jesus (just playing Ryan).
I was greatly dissapointed by my church (which some of you know but will go unnamed for now). I know that's not the topic of this blog, but when we think about what an Easter service should be (purpose, etc) this one was everything it shouldn't be. All the music was set to high church organ, and for half of the songs, the congregation was totally uninvolved, sitting watching a performance and prasing this organist. So he only has one arm. That's amazing. But if I was an unbeliever visiting I would have been thinking "this is exactly why I don't go to church." The service was geared completely toward older generation believers and had zilch for the large unbeliever crowd that was likely there. I appologize if this rant is unfounded or inappropriate, but I was just very dissapointed in a church that otherwise is great and I love very much. When presented with the greatest opportunity on a Sunday morning in the year to reach unbelievers, they were more inaccessable than usual.
I guess I'll pose this question if anyone would care to address it:
What should an Easter service purpose to do? Should it simply be like a normal service for the particular church, just with different content in the sermon? Or should it gear its intentionality differently? You've probably sensed my leaning by reading my previous post, but I wonder what others' thoughts are.
Nathaniel
I'll respond only bcause you asked for one. Two parts.
First, I just finished watching a film called "The Ultimate Gift" with James Garner and Drew Fuller (2006). So that's the emotional context of my post.
First, maybe I didn't understand entirely what you meant, but I was put off by your statement...
"The service was geared completely toward older generation believers and had zilch for the large unbeliever crowd that was likely there."
When 90% of services are geared completely toward younger people, why is it so out of line to make a service go the other way for a change? I'm 57 years old. What am I chopped liver? I'm really glad that Jesus loves older people too.
It breaks my heart the way the evangelical church has bought into the youth cult in this country. It's really sad how we've supposedly geared everything toward the youth for the past 30+ years supposedly to "reach them" and produced young adults who are angry and seem to think everything should revolve around them in every facet of life. There seems to be a real self-centerdness about that. Seems kind of contrary to Jesus' teaching too...hmmm.
When I visit evangelical churches around the country I often feel like singing the old song, "Where have all the flowers gone?..." with new words, "Where have all the old folks gone?..."
You see, contrary to our postmodern youth culture, that puts such a premium on "reaching young people," old people also represent souls that need saving.
Second, I don't do much different on Easter than I do other weeks. I always try to make Jesus Christ the focus of each week's service.
Yesterday we added communion to our worship time. I shared the two reasons we take communion and then we all knelt around our living room coffee table in a circle, prayed and partook of the emblems.
I think it should be geared towards visitors at least on Easter because it is the greatest opportunity to reach those rare souls who darken the doors of a church but once a year. My church attendance is phenominal, usually they average about 2200 people a Sunday, and yesterday we had 3500!. I can only imagine answering to Christ for missing an opportunity like that to minister to the unsaved.
Having said that I think the church should stick with their target audience for the most part but statistically younger people are a lot more likely to respond to the Gospel than older. Not that older generations aren't important. We just need to know our missions, vision, and values, and let those things determine how we do church. You can't win everyone and naturally some people will dislike whatever approach you choose.
fisher,
3500! That is phenominal! Praise the Lord! Out of those, how many accepted Jesus as their Savior? How many recommitted their lives to the Lord? Were there people filled with the Holy Spirit?
You said, "I think it should be geared towards visitors at least on Easter because it is the greatest opportunity to reach those rare souls who darken the doors of a church but once a year." If the focus is on Jesus Christ the rest of the year, and our goal is to lead them to Jesus Christ all year, what changes on Easter?
When you said, "I can only imagine answering to Christ for missing an opportunity like that to minister to the unsaved." I agree! But I would also not want to answer to Christ for missing the opportunity to reach the "one" unsaved person for Him too.
I'm sorry, but I really have to take issue with your paragraph that said: "statistically younger people are a lot more likely to respond to the Gospel than older. Not that older generations aren't important. We just need to know our missions, vision, and values, and let those things determine how we do church. You can't win everyone and naturally some people will dislike whatever approach you choose." I've heard this patter for years as a way to excuse winning the older generation to Christ as if statistical numbers are the most important thing in "doing church."
My contention is that we repeat that mantra ad nauseum and somehow believe we are actually reaching the "young people." We give them more of what they already get in the world to attract them and then expect their lives to change after they come in. They take the attitude that it's like bait and switch if we expect them to change anything. So we give them more of what they originally got to keep them.
I wonder about the terms we use "reach the unsaved", "minister to the lost", what are we really saying we are doing? Besides the numbers of people we can fit in our pews, what do we accomplish?
I would be interested in seeing a church actually keep track of the people who come in the front doors from day one and actually measure what effect the church is having on their spiritual lives over time. How many stay with Jesus after they accept Him. How many get baptized in the Holy Spirit, but actually continue on to pray for their unsaved neighbors in the Spirit. How many actually lead another non-Christian to Christ and then disciple them. Those numbers might be quite a bit more interesting.
Wagner,
If you think I'm against older people you're mistaken and perhaps you should actually have a conversation with me before you pretend to know what's in my heart and mind.
Moreover, you misinterpreted my comment. What hurt me on Easter Sunday was not specifically that the service was oriented toward an older generation (which it was) but that it was oriented toward belivers not unbelivers. The issue I have is not an "old vs young" but are we reaching the lost verses appeasing the "saved?"
certainly believers, including older and younger ones, need their faith challenged and encouraged, and Easter should be no exception to this process. However, couldn't and shouldn't it be done in a way that is sensitive to the throngs of unbelievers that are likely in attendence? That's my observation. Hopefully it's made clear at this point. I don't resent a church that seeks to reach young people or a church that engages an older generation. I just hope we can have churches that find creative ways to minister to and through both groups and most of all, bring the gospel to the lost.
There were 105 decisions, although as with every church it is hard to quantify a personal response.
The thing that changes on Easter is the number of visitors. I think as Christians we should always preach Christ, but there is always a balance between preaching for salvation and preaching for edification. Not that the two are mutually exclusive but as people we always tend to lean to one end of the spectrum or the other and it is hard to be balanced. On Easter, the greatest opportunity to reach the unsaved who voluntarily come to church I think we need to seize the opportunity to swing the balance to preach for salvation.
The main thing for me in being generational specific is that we attract people who are most like us. As a young person my odds of reaching older people go way down. Which makes me more excited to do that very thing, although it would be more of the exception than the rule. Pastors mostly need to have churches that reach their generation for this reason, so for me this is younger people. However, this shouldn't be an excuse for churches to shut themselves off from the progression of time. As an older man using a blog to dialog on the internet, It's obvious to me that you are somewhat progressive. Do you really want a church that still uses hymnals and overhead projectors all the time? Maybe you do, and that's fine for you and thankfully there are churches that still do for that small niche of people, although most people seem to want methods that are current and jive with everything the experience outside of church in terms of cultural relevance and methodology.
Numbers are important. There is a book in the Bible, called Numbers. In Acts it records a lot of numbers. 3000, 5000... Not that they are the end all, but certainly they are important and aside from the raging debate about how to quantify true growth and discipleship they are sort of the best thing we have to accomplish the task, although admittedly imperfect.
Sort of in continuation to my last post in order to clear up things I think may be misunderstood... In terms of numbers they are important but certainly not the end all. The real issue comes down to being faithful with what you have to work with and being the best stewards with whomever comes your way whether 10 people or a thousand. The church I attend is an anomaly in terms of size and in the top percentile by that metric. The average church is less than a hundred, but regardless of size I think all churches need to be about the Father's business, and that is reaching out to the lost. Methodology needs to be contextualized to your audience and can only be judged by that criteria and faithfulness to the Bible.
The main concern for me in this string of posts is what Nathaniel mentioned about having Easter sunday, the best opportunity to reach visitors, geared towards insiders instead of outsiders. That just should not be, it's poor stewardship and just lacks common sense.
Brian, in response to what you said, perhaps my stats are slanted and fuzzy. Roughly 80% of people come to Christ by 18. So the majority of people respond when younger. Then usually there is a period of rebellion followed often by a coming back to things of eternal perspective. It would be interesting to have hard stats on salvations in old age, but certain most people can attest to the common observation that people who make it to their later years without God are generally near impossible to win. It's more an issue of being set in your ways than age. (I'm sure deathbed conversions might raise the statistic a bit though as there aren't a lot of atheists on the deathbed.) There are a lot of cynics in younger generations but we tend to be spiritually open cynics as the queen of talk show spirituality, Oprah can attest.
Another key in this issue as Brian attested in his own church is the tendency for churches to bring themselves to a state of equillibrium. We work real hard getting up to a sort of terminal velocity of numbers where the bills are paid and life is good and then turn our focus into maintaining the flock rather than reaching the lost. I think as mature Christians and the already saved we need to be the bigger men and give up some of our preferences and freedoms to reach the lost. Most people tend to prefer the music of their teens, so I will probably hate what people respond to in 20 years but God willing I will be man enough to sacrifice my preference to reach the community that God has called me to. (More to the point hopefully I will be man enough to risk angering those who already tithe to reach those who don't)
I guess from my perspective, since becoming a Christian I have been an active member in about 4 main churches and attended scores of others. Two of these were small and inwardly focused and two were mega churches. One of these mega churches was in Florida in a college town and the average age was about 55. It was a nice church and had a lot of great things, but they weren't really winning people to Christ. They seemed satisfied to serve whatever snowbirds drifted their way and were able to very comfortably meet their needs with excellence because these people tithe. The church I meet now is young with the average age below 40, although I don't have an exact number. They are hip, and use words like relevant, authentic, rockin... They have loud concert like worship which they get a lot of complaints about and lights, oh yeah also, they reach people by the droves and do more for the community in terms of service and outreach than any church I have had the privelege of being a part of.
The thing is, it's not about methodology or targeting, although these things seem to pay dividends. The point is being intentional about the Great Commission and missional minded. There are a lot of great small churches who do a lot of things very well, but how are they in terms of seeking that which is lost? There is something about being missional minded and being Christlike that allows the Holy Spirit to more effectively draw men unto Himself. When the church is operating after the model of Christ and the early church, people get saved and it is magnetic.
On the flip side of that when a lot of new believers are in the church it is hard to disciple them, but how is this any different than the biblical example of Corinth? Paul wrote to set them straight but it is still a biblical example of the church.
The older mega church I attended had all their doctinal lines in order and a lot of mature believers, except they didn't value evangelism...oops
Personally I feel a lot better about being surrounded by foolish babes in Christ than stagnated scholars. (That is probably a hyperbolic list of extremes, the ideal would contain a mixture of both, but is also sort of like catching lightning in a bottle as the pendulum seems to swing from one end to the other. New church with lots of converts to plateaud church with consistent attendance to stagnant and declining church with no converts and many strong biblical minded Christians who are self centered.) The job of the pastor is to navigate this terrain and cycle holding as closely to the Bible and Christ as possible in pursuit of the Great Commission. Good thing He can use our weaknesses.
(I am once again, the king of off topic) Sorry I will try not to rant, although I'm not very good at it.
I'm not advocating "rockin music" etc in order to appeal to postmoderns. When you say that feels like a concert, Brian, you're right, it can. But so can a choir singing 200 year old hymns to an organ with the congregation sitting on their asses politely clapping for the performers. I'm getting the impression that some of you think we should make it difficult for people to come to Christ, but this is precicely what the early church condemned in Acts 15. We need to remove barriers, make our community more accessable and accepting, and demonstrate the grace and love of God in meaningful ways in both word and deed.
I've always wondered why we need so many churches when we're all Christians. This conversation is starting to help me understand why.
Nate,
Good point, but I don't think that I intentionally try to make it difficult for the lost to come to Jesus. I do however get the feeling that this wanting to reach the "post-moderns and the younger adult generation" relys to heavy on our ability to navigate culture then the power of the Word of God.
Yes, we need to sacrafice to reach the lost but does that mean we need to be entertained? I read a article recently in News Week it talked about Boredom and that we Americans do not expereince it anymore because we have so much going on due to technological advances. It mentioned also the importance of Boredom and how it gives people a time to reflect and look inward.
So what I take from the article is that although it didn't talk about church it did talk about our society...people do not want to be bored, they need to be entertained and their senses appealed to. So it would make sense that if we are to fill the pews we have to entertain or else they would not come in. This not just for the lost but also for the flock...they too need this constant entertainment because they are living in the same realm as thoes who are not lost.
I don't know the answers and I struggle with the idea of doing church to target a certain audience... to me I see no differnce in those kind of services as compared to watching Oprah or listening to the motivational speaker Joel Olsteen.
I do not doubt that people are brought to Christ through such targeted services but I question why is the Church is not allowed to have a culture of its own that is respected and why is it that the church is expected to change?
I do not know what Paul would do to reach one of our modern cities....the fact is no one can say they know; sure we can extrapulate based on his mission in Athens but the idea of reaching the lost in our present society is daunting and proves again that we really need to seek God and allow the Holy Spirit to direct us.
In the end it doesn't matter what my opinons or my preferences are, but my obedience to the leading of the Holy Sprit.
I am glad that we can converse on this blog. Seeing both sides of the spectrum helps clear the water. I sense that you were a bit agitated in your last blog and I hope that your zeal continues and that my conversation is not seen or taken in a critical way. I am struggeling with the same issues that others have blogged about, some seem convinced of their point of view, I however am still learning and hoping to be infomed by thoes out there who are in the trenches and doing the work of God.
Brian
I appreciate the open forum discussion the blog provides as well although I operate with strong presuppositions...which is why the blog is helpful to provide balance.
I really hate the term Post-modern because of all that it has come to mean and be associated with, and yet because I am under 35ish it describes me more accurately than I like to admit. I think people sometimes look at post moderns as people who make a choice to be the way they are but in reality we are this way because of our experiences in the world. If I really had a choice, I might not choose post modern...ok I probably would still, but that's not the point. I don't have a choice. I grew up in a world with free thought and open dialog and group projects and discussion. I grew up being turned off by flashy tv personalities so things that are authentic speak to me... It's like I'm Pavlov's dog here...
The reality is that most younger generations operate from this basic paradigm, at least on a presuppositional level and so the church must work within those guidelines if it is to continue growing. (not to be mistaken, God will always find a way, but I would rather be involved than have him circumnavigate me).
Following the model of Christ as prophet, priest, and king, our role as leaders must address all these areas. We must rely on God's as our foundation, but he has given us gifts and talents specifically for the body, and one of these is definitely the ability to navigate culture as a prophetic voice calling people to the way of the Lord. We see at times the prophets were relevant, edgy, and at times looked crazy, although throughout they pointed to Christ.
What's wrong with the church being entertaining, if at the same time it is convicting? Sometimes when I read the Bible I laugh and am convicted. I don't think they are mutually exclusive, although entertainment isn't the end all changed lives are. As a seminarian and person whos dedicating my life to ministry, I don't like boring sermons. How can I expect non-christians to tolerate more than myself? Again, we're not in the entertainment business, but people still have to be interested in the Father's business if we want to stay open. The Bible is timeless, but we must contextualize it to make people who wouldn't ordinarily see it become engrossed in it's beauty and relevance so that they seek it for themselves.
In terms of targeting certain audiences I think the wisdom literature has a lot to say about well layed plans. There is a part in Alice in Wonderland where alice asks the cat which road to take to which he asks, "where do you want to go" she responds, "I don't know" at which point the cat responds, "it doesn't really matter which road you take then. - so I butchered and misquoted from memory a great illustration...the point is, as leaders we need to know where we are going because if we don't have a target everything looks like a bullseye. It's like shooting an arrow and then drawing a red dot wherever we hit...great job! although we really havn't reached anyone at all.
The church is unique and countercultural and must retain that in that we are true to the Bible, methodology is really insignificant to me though assuming it submits to the word. When I read "I do not doubt that people are brought to Christ through such targeted services but" I find myself stop. People are being brought to Christ...enough said
Thanks for the opportunity for me to share my passions, I don't mean to be mean spirited, ministry just invigorates me.
Nathaniel,
Judging from your respnse I obviously offended you with my post. I'm sorry for that. I sincerely do not intend my posts to be offensive, although in any discussion where people hold passionate views about issues this is a possibility.
I definitely was not pretending to know what was in your heart and mind. I was merely responding to what I perceived you to be saying in your post.
For my offense I sincerely ask you to forgive me.
certainly accepted John. I hope that we've challenged each other a bit - that's a good thing. My initial comments were misinterpreted and I see how that happened without there being face-to-face contact and I didn't explain myself enough, but I'm sure you can see where I stand now upon further explanation in this blog. I see that it can be easy to jump on something someone says without first questioning what they actually meant. I was not hoping to open a can of worms for a debate but simply to spawn an open-minded questioning of how Easter services can be used to reach nonbelievers rather than how we can defend our own presuppositions. Sorry if I came accross unduly strong or angry. As you said, ministry has its passions and sometimes they get the better of us. Hopefully we can learn from each other.
Well, our church did a number of things for its Easter Celebration, primarily special music. It was pretty cool.
I remember a preacher could speak very very fast,and he was anointed by the Holy Spirit.A Chi Alpha group invited him to share the Gospel in the state University.The preacher used some Irish traditional music for the climax of his message about the resurrection of Jesus in a music hall. The music echoed in the hall was great and dramatical, then many people responded to alter call.
Post a Comment