Revealing Evangelical assumptions?

Great Debates
1

There’s an interesting article posted on Yahoo news regarding how some of the mega churches won’t be open on Christmas Sunday.

For reference, it is here.

The article quotes a seminary professor who appears disgusted by their decision. Some of the reasons surprised me:

To me this quote suggests that if people like Dr. Wells had their way, the church should be imposed on people and only a consumer mentality prevents that from happening; and that secondly, individualism is held with deep suspicion. On the other hand, he could be saying that it is wrong for the mega churches to close based on the argument that holding a service on Christmas Sunday would be a nuisance, an imposition on everyone’s holiday time. Further, his last remark could also be interpreted as simply regretting a lack of community-feeling he presumably feels the day should inspire. However, since the decision to close the churches seems to be driven by the fact that people prefer to spend Christmas with their families, one implication would be that Wells’ sense of community exists only within a Church service, and that even families eschewing it to be together in private are somehow in on the “consumer mentality” he decries.

What do you all think about Dr. Wells’ statement? Is it unintentionally awkward? Does my interpretation stray too far toward the sinister? I’m starting to think it does with regards to my take on “imposition.” When I first read the quote, my attention fixated on it because in decrying the negative ('Let’s not impose . . .") he seemed to be championing the opposite. I now mostly think that’s probably not quite what he meant, but I’m not entirely sure. I’m having a harder time with the last part of his statement, which seems to dislike individualism.

2

I do believe that your overall reaction was due to a misreading of his comments and that this is closer to what he intended.

In regards to your larger question: religion is based on communal worship.* (That is one reason why the various posters who seem to wish to equate atheism with a “religion” always seem bit odd, to me. Whatever one’s beliefs about (a) god or the lack, atheists never come together to celebrate the lack of the divine.) There is very much a spirit of individualism in the U.S. that works against that form of worship. A person who chooses to support religion is very likely to bemoan those societal trendencies that work against that communal celebration.

  • Religion is not spirituality. Any number of people have chosen to worship (a) god “in their own way” or by themselves, over the years. It does not denigrate their belief to note tht they are not participating in a religion.
3

I think the short answer is that yes, you are reading things into this that are not necessarily there. For instance, I really doubt that Dr. Wells would lump “the desire to spend time with your family” under “consumerism”. I bet he would consider these different things.

What he is objecting to is the decision to close the mega-churches on Christmas because people are not attending because they are too busy doing other, presumably semi-secular things - wrapping presents, cooking, driving, whatever - and do not find it convenient to take the time to attend church. Whether or not you think this is true, I find it hard to believe that Dr. Wells would like to impose church on everybody.

If you like, reread the quote and substitute “closing a supermarket” on Christmas for “closing a mega-church”, and see if the same implications seem likely to you.

Regards,
Shodan

4

I think the point of it is simply that if you are a Christian, the Holiday ought to be primarily a religious occasion, and the gift-giving and all the rest are fine, but secondary. The fact that people would forego a regularly-scheduled church service that they would otherwise attend reveals (from a theological point of view) skewed priorities.

And yes, Christianity can sometimes be at odds with individualism. It makes truth claims that you must accept or reject. An essential part of a Christian worldview is that right and wrong are not whatever you think they are.

I think rather than wanting to “impose” anything, what he’s advocating is that churches not kowtow to twentieth-century american culture that says the customer is always right; that instead they say what they believe, insist their parishoners live up to what they say they believe (even when inconvenient), honor their traditions (even if those traditions aren’t always perfectly suited to current tastes), and let the chips fall where they may.

“Let’s not impose the church on people” is the reaction he expects; it does not follow that “imposition” is what he advocates is imposition.
I will add, though, that many megachurches’ sunday AM services are “seeker services” and designed to appeal to people who are not already churchgoers. For those churches, cancelling the services makes complete sense.

5

To my mind, this is the bottom line regarding the decision to close:

And…

And…

That’s it, right there. Mega-churches are all “about” the numbers, and if you don’t have the numbers, then you close up shop. If you don’t have the staffing, then you gotta close.

And then there was this astonishing statement:

“Working”?

Excuse me?

If you’re a “volunteer”, then you’re not “working”. And especially if you’re a volunteer doing church stuff, for your church, then what you do is a gift to God and to the church, and if you’re regarding it as “working”–if you find yourself being grateful that you’re getting “a day off”–then it’s not a “gift” anymore, it’s a “chore”, and you shouldn’t be doing it at all.

I’ve been in charge of preschool programs at my church where people were obviously regarding, say, helping once a quarter in the preschool department as “work”, and where they were eagerly anticipating getting “a day off” because of a church special event where their services would not be required after all, and those people I found ways to tactfully suggest to them that they find some other way to serve the church. If they don’t wanna be there, then I don’t want them there.

I can’t imagine how God is being glorified by having hundreds of “volunteers” in American mega-churches every Sunday morning begrudging the time they’re spending in ushering, or teaching Sunday School, or directing traffic in the parking lot, or babysitting in the nursery. Wonder what He thinks of that.

Which is what my church does when Christmas falls on a Sunday–the two services are combined in one early service, with no Sunday School afterwards.

But it’s not “because we don’t think enough people will come to warrant opening up the church”–it’s because it’s recognized that folks want to spend time on Christmas Day itself having special celebrations.

And, also, it’s billed as a chance to meet the folks from “The Other Service” (“Our Church Family All Together In One Place”), which is always amusing and instructive. :smiley:

6

Heck, it’s an essential part of cilivized society in general.

7

Not so much the megachurches per se. Rather, it’s the self-described “seeker-sensitive” churches (of the Willow Creek variety) that tend to place undue importance on numbers. Unfortunately (and by no coincidence), many of the megachurches do indeed subscribe to the so-called “seeker-sensitive” philosophy.

8

I trust the ministers of these churches are not doing any “Put Christ back into Christmas” sermons, are they? Not that my goose is gored, but I can’t see what takes Christ out of Christmas more than present opening instead of church-going (which I assume doesn’t last all day.)

I must add that revising religion to sell the product is in the oldest tradition of Christianity - which is why you goyim aren’t circumcised and get to eat shellfish.

9

Along with what the others have posted, I’ll say that I think he’s also railing against the impulse to make church ‘easy and convenient.’ Christianity is not supposed to be easy and convenient, it’s supposed to be good for your soul and often requires sacrifice and difficulty (as well as reaping great blessings and joy, of course). It’s like exercise in a way; no pain, no gain. Going to church on Christmas would not strike most religious people as a big sacrifice but a pleasure (I’m looking forward to it myself), so closing church to make things convenient looks like an extreme of bending over backwards in the wrong direction.

I would definitely not say that Dr. Wells want to ‘impose church on everyone.’ He’s not saying that everyone should be made to go to church. He’s saying that closing church out of a fear that going to church on Christmas is an imposition on people’s time (people who already go to church) reflects skewed priorities.

10

BTW, I’m positively appalled by the statement from Willow Creek Community Church, in which their spokesperson said,

I think this betrays tremendous ignorance of what church attendance is all about! Its purpose is not solely to reach the lost, after all. What about worship? What about exhortation? What about the training and education of believers?

In fact, the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20) doesn’t specifically command evangelism. Rather, it commands the church to “disciple all nations,” of which evangelism is merely a small part. Unfortunately, when churches place excessive emphasis on attendance numbers (as DDG pointed out), then these other things tend to fall by the wayside.

11

No, it betrays your ignorance about Willow Creek’s model. Their Sunday AM services are designed for non-churchgoers; worship and education are done at other times and other forums (weeknight services, small groups, etc).

I am not a huge fan of megachurches or the seeker-service phenomenon; but it is flatly untrue to imply that these churches do not do teaching or worship. They just don’t do it at traditional times or in traditional ways.

12

No, I’m familiar with their model. In fact, the links that I provided emphasis that fact. I was responding to the specific statement that the mission of Christianity “is to reach the unchurched, basically the people who don’t go to church.” As I said, that is only a small part of what the church is truly called to do.

I never said that they don’t do teaching or worship. I have grave reservations about the quality and content of their instruction and worship, but I would never say that they don’t teach or worship at all.

13

Very odd that “only a small number” of people showed up to pray the last time Christmas fell on a Sunday. The opposite is true in Catholic churches: Whatever day it falls on, Christmas is the best attended mass of the year, packed with people you don’t normally see. Christmas on a Sunday would bring even more celebrants.

14

For Christmas Eve service no matter what day of the week, people show up… that and Easter. (the “lily & poinsettia” group)

Regular Sunday Service on Christmas day does tend to be less well attended than non-Christmas Sundays. It seems bizarre to cancel services altogether, though.

15

That’s completely wrong. Just because one is not getting paid doesn’t make the activity any less “work.” I’m not getting paid to clean my own house, am I not “working?”

I have done volunteer work. It’s definitely work. Sometimes more work than what I get paid to do at my place of employment. The reward is often more, er, rewarding than a paycheck too (even though I cannot pay the rent with it.)

16

Hi!
I haven’t been here long, or posted very much, so I hope I don’t come off too critical with this.
Here goes.

“Another area that suffers when a church adopts a seeker-sensitive approach is the tone of the worship service. To appeal to a broader audience, many church leaders are taking their cues from the world. They’re adopting the same entertainment and marketing devices the world employs. Film clips, skits, comedy, pyrotechnics, light shows, and an over indulgence in music are just some of the trappings of the seeker-sensitive church. God is no longer the center of worship—entertainment, “felt needs,” and fleshly desires reign supreme.”

Church attendence is hitting lower and lower numbers every year.
Very few, if any, western churches are actually growing in number.
Wouldn’t “seeker-sensitive” services be just the natural progression?

I’ve been studying religions for a few years now, and it seems that if most branches of Christianity are to survive at all, they have to bring up their attendence. There must be some reason why this “seeker sensitive movement” thing has caught on.

I know a lot of you have expressed some grief about it, hell (no pun intended) even I am against it (I am atheist).

What do you (those who seem to be against it) propose churches do to fill more pews with people?

17

Don’t know how I’d feel about it if I were in a mega-church, but I do have three comments.

From what I understand, all these mega-churches which aren’t having C’mas Morn services that Sunday are having C’mas Eve services. And using the old understanding of the day beginning at sundown, that equates to C’mas Day services.

The criticism “all they care about is numbers” is rather superficial as they can easily reply “Numbers of what? People! We care about reaching people. If we go overboard in being seeker-sensitive, then maybe it’s a corrective to the long stretches of time that churches were seeker-insensitive.”

Finally, even the most dedicated church volunteers do get worn down- and even if they are volunteering, what are they volunteering to do? WORK! Now, some may just do it occasionally, and whine about needing a break, but those 10% of the membership who do 90% of the work may justly desire & deserve such a break.

18

This is an illogical poistion since one cannot accept a Christian worldview or submit to Christian standards of “right and wrong” without first “thinking” that it’s the “right” thing to do so. Thinking that Christian morality is valid is still an example of right and wrong being whatever you think it is.

19

Strangely, perhaps, I agree with both Furt and Diogenes on this issue. Christianity indeed makes truth claims, but Jesus equated truth and freedom. They are spiritual synonyms. Diogenes seems on the mark to me as well. One will tend not to reject what he believes to be the Chrisitan worldview unless he believes it to be wrong. In the end, if we are free, then we are individuals, and if truth is freedom, then God endorses individuality. And that makes sense. After all, He made us as free moral agents. Speaking for myself, I do not view morality as a dichotomy between right and wrong, but between valuable and worthless. Goodness is an aesthetic, and God happens to value goodness above all else.