McChurch?
I’m just wondering what Fusioneers think about the whole McChurch thing. You know, churches these days using the same glitz and glam that secular businesses use to market themselves as purveyors of goods and services.
Sell-out to our materialistic age, necessary accommodation to the times, or something in between? What say ye?
56 Comments
Comments are closed.
Mike the Eyeguy
I would really like to up the comment count here (there’s a method behind the madness). Come on all you lurkers, decloak just this once! Please?
Hal
It’s difficult for me to comment on this one because I sort of straddle the fence on this issue. There are certain advantages to carrying out the Great Commission when a church markets itself as a seeker friendly type church. But, it can only be truly effective in carrying out that mission if it is truly presenting the gospel of Christ to those who show up. The disadvantage that I see is that more mature believers need to be fed, and all that glitz and glam is just a facade – not very nourishing to a more mature believer.
My preference is for a church that is true to God’s Word in its preaching and worship as well as warm, friendly and welcoming to ALL visitors. I’m not a fan of the glitz and glam. OK, now I’ve unstraddled the fence. I must admit, it’s a lot more comfortable off of that fence.
Mike the Eyeguy
“The disadvantage that I see is that more mature believers need to be fed, and all that glitz and glam is just a facade – not very nourishing to a more mature believer.”
Exactly. Nor does that approach do much to move the seeker, once you have her in the door, onward to maturity.
Scott
And let’s face it: people aren’t beating a path to our sanctuaries for the show we can provide. I can get better bang for my buck without ever leaving my couch. We can’t compete with the world when it comes to “glitz and glam.” They don’t expect us to and we don’t need to.
It’s far past the time for us to expect to attract people to our services, we have to go out to them and invest in life-changing relationships.
GKB
I like to think about the relationship between marketing and substance.
McDonald’s has to advertise like crazy, because their food sucks. It’s bad for you.
Some of my favorite places to eat or drink coffee don’t advertise, because the food, the ambiance, the whole experience (the substance, if you will) speaks for itself.
Maybe our churches suck, or offer lifeless, soulless food, and have to market or spin themselves to attract customers. What if we concentrated on what was on the menu?
Mike the Eyeguy
Scott–
You mean we don’t have to build a multi-multi million dollar megaplex and then draw them with in a laser light show and dry ice fog machine? Are you saying that the way we witness during the week (at our jobs, in our homes, in our communities) counts as much or more as what we do “in the building” on Sundays? Are you saying that we (gulp) need to get our hands dirty?
Good grief man! Such heresy!
GKB–
Substance over style? Gourmet over fast food? Depth over superficiality? Hmmm, I’ll give that some thought…
Mike the Eyeguy
…okay, GKB, I gave that some thought and I think you may be on to something with that menu analogy.
I recently was traveling back from a football game in Tuscaloosa and got the munchies somewhere around south Birmingham. The only restaurant open at that ungodly hour was McDonald’s. I had not eaten anything besides breakfast there in years, but I was desperate.
I was pleasantly surprised to find some items on the menu which were relatively healthy, but you really had to dig. I got a grilled chicken snack wrap in keeping with my current philosophy on food and my desire to maintain my (*cough*) svelte and athletic build.
But I looked around, and most people were still there for the Big Macs and fries. McDonald’s makes some provisions for the few but still markets mainly to the masses, giving them what the surveys and focus groups say they want. Churches, it seems to me, seem to be following the same model.
Of course, there was a time when churches actually gave people what they thought they needed rather than what they wanted.
Mike the Eyeguy
And BTW, don’t be expecting a football post tomorrow, Fusioneers.
While the Crimson Tide and SEC football are matters of utmost importance, this topic ranks even higher. Hard to imagine, I know, but true.
This post is staying up until we have at least 50 comments. So, if you want me to ever move on, GET BUSY PEOPLE!
Alan Gable
Recently, I’ve heard a bunch of criticism about churches using supposedly secular methods for “bringing folks in the doors”. Maybe I’m a “young liberal whippersnapper” but maybe a good idea is a good idea whether it is in the business world or in the Church. We face a new breed of cynicism from unchurched people and that has to be combated with new breeds of reaching people. The previous generations used “marketing” but those forms of marketing may not work the way they used to. Example – Door knocking. How would doorknocking with some filmstrip be different than the marketing churches are using today?
Mike the Eyeguy
Dear Young Liberal Whippersnapper,
I never went in much for the whole Jule Miller filmstrip/door knocking approach either, although I will admit to getting a little excited as a youth when my Dad let me advance the filmstrip when the little “ding” went off.
It’s interesting, but I’m hearing mixed signals from other Gen Y’ers and Millennials regarding multimedia, “emerging church” approaches. Maybe not quite a backlash, but an expressed desire for something older and more tried and true in addition to contemporary media (I’ve heard the term “ancient/future” bandied about, and I would like to learn more about that and what that means).
As to cynicism, I believe there’s a risk that just as many might be put off by yet another slick, manipulative marketing campaign as would be drawn to it. And again, does this approach feed the consumerism mentality which is already out of control in today’s society as it is?
It may be that more people than might be imagined are generally tired of the world and its ways come Sunday and would like something that enables them to transcend the ordinary and mundane and rise toward God and not feel like they’re watching yet another infomercial or attending a stockholder’s meeting. Or, in the case of some churches, another highly choreographed rock concert.
Mike the Eyeguy
I’ve been told by more than one person that I might feel differently about all this if I was in charge of growing my own multi-million dollar business. That might be true.
But does it make it right?
Mike the Eyeguy
Speaking of businesses, I don’t think it’s too much of a broad brush to say that the majority of leaders in charge of churches of the mega-evangelical, Protestant stripe are good-hearted, well-intended men who have made their mark in the professional or business world. So, it’s really not too surprising to see left-brained, bottom-line, business model approaches to outreach and trouble-shooting predominate the scene. After all, it they worked well in one area, why not another?
“If you’re a hammer, then everything looks like a nail.”
Mike the Eyeguy
Well, obviously I’m trying to drive up the comment count because I don’t trust my faithfully-reading but rarely-commenting audience to pick up the slack. š
It’s okay, I understand–it rarely pays to stick your neck out.
KS
Would tend to go with the substance over style. If we must draw people in, I think we lose the main point of Christianity…it’s different. It’s a better way to live.
Bill Gnade
Mike,
I believe McChurch should join the rest of his Scottish brethren and keep things simple.
Sincerely,
McFly
PS. I think I am guilty of holding too many McPinions on such matters. But simple is good. After all, theyāll know we are Christians not by our orthodoxy, our worship, our cathedral, our zeal or earnestness; or our ability to āsaveā and love the lost. They will know our Faith by how we LOVE EACH OTHER. Itās a loony idea, I know. Thatās why Iām known back in the Highlands as Tad McCrazy.
Mike the Eyeguy
KS–thanks for that timely reminder that Christianity was originally known as The Way and not The Edifice.
Bill–you old salty philosopher you, how are ya? Still sassy and full of mirth, I see. Good.
And on point, as usual.
Stoogelover
I haven’t read all the responses, so this may have been said, but I tend to agree with you. Seems we’re trying to market something that’s not of this world … the kingdom. If we’d spend as much energy being who are supposed to be rather than telling people who we’re supposed to be, we probably wouldn’t need to advertise at all. I know, a shallow answer to a complex question, but what can I say? I’m a shallow guy!!
mmlace
Well I may be just another young whippernsapper as well (even younger than brother Alan up there!) but I have mixed feelings about this. I guess I’m kinda still on the fence, but I think I lean more towards the direction of those who can at least recognize the good purpose that trying to draw people in serves. I’m gonna have to think on this one for awhile…I’ll be back…
And hey, that’ll be yet another comment on here!
And 7:35 in the a.m. is too late for you to be posting…were you running behind schedule this morning??? You gotta get it up there by about 7:15 for me to have a chance to read (much less comment!) before I head out the door to work!
reJoyce
Okay. I’m delurking. But, now that I’ve delurked, what on earth to say? I suppose I’d rather have people coming to my church because they’ve heard we really follow Jesus, rather than for a light show. But, on the other hand, if we’re really following Jesus, I don’t know that a light show is necessarily a bad thing. I don’t think I’d want it if that was all there was though.
Mike the Eyeguy
sl–You may laugh like Curly and may have spent a lot of time in Alabama, but you are not a shallow man. As a recently retired man o’ the cloth and current new church seeker, your thoughts are especially valuable.
mmlace–sheesh, you’re not demanding or anything! Don’t strain something with all that thinking you’re doing over there. š
reJoyce–You comment too often to be considered a bona fide lurker! The problem as I see it is not “light shows” per se (although they can be a bit schmaltzy and gaudy if overdone) but the substitute of stylish media and ad campaigns over content and depth.
A for instance: youth ministry today is heavily invested in pulse-quickening media and flashy functions such as the mega-rallies at Christian college campuses, yet these same kids who went through 4-6 years of that are leaving church in droves as they enter college and the young adult years.
Oops, could it be that we mistook glitz and flash for a faith foundation that was deep enough and strong enough to survive the storms of young adulthood?
mmlace
Hey, you were the one begging for comments…I was just tryin to explain why I was unable to leave one this morning! Sorry, do not mean to be demanding…I was only slightly bummed that I did not get my Dr. Eyeguy fix before leaving this morning.
On the other hand, I was very pleasantly surprised to find such a thought-provoking post and multiple comments for me to delve into when I got in from work this evening!
JRB
After some cursory reading on the “emerging church,” the term and “movement” tends to reject the glitz, glam and marketing but promotes a return to church based in intimate community.
If your church (our church? mega-churches?) are changing to a marketing-based, flash-entertainment model, chasing trends, in an attempt to grab Gen-X and younger gens, the effort is misplaced. As someone else notes, the church can’t go that as well as MTV, etc.
Not only can we not do it as well in the church, that is not our job.
From my point of view, the churches who are growing in substance among our generation have two traits in common:
1. Authentic communty. That is, a step beyond the “worship service,” and a commitment to creating genuine, active relationships, through small groups, etc.
2. A genuine, fruitful interest in “the least of these,” welcoming Others and The Other with hospitality.
JRB
In other news, I am in T-town tonight and had a very nice run around campus before starting my conference tonight. I saw the Tide baseball team and the Million Dollar Band practicing, and I saw Coach Saban’s very, very sleak Mercedes in his parking spot.
I also think I experienced my first post-run, hypoglycemic, near bonk, after the run. It was unpleasant, but thanks for the grace of lemonade when I needed it.
JRB
Let us consider this premise:
Is the age of the Sunday Morning Worship Service coming to an end?
Surely we are called to worship in assembly before the Lord and for very great reasons, but the church may be feeling pressure from the marketplace of seekers and young disciples to shift the primary emphasis from Sunday Morning Worship Service to actually bearing fruit among our neighbors.
JRB
From rudetruth.blogspot.com, JTB, a Princeton/ACU seminary grad and very smart writer makes a very insightful observation:
“A final note. I enjoyed the sermon, although it was definitely a message for a large suburban CofC. The main theme, that the US is now a “mission area,” based on the observation that church involvement in the US is declining while it is growing exponentially in areas such as Central and South America, Africa, and China is probably indisputable. But what I wish I had heard more of is, what kind of a mission area is the US? Is it a mission area of unchurched people totally ignorant of Christianity? Hardly. If the US is a mission area it is one unlike our usual conception of the term; it is a mission area comprised of people who are so Christianized that they’ve forgotten what that means, and who didn’t notice when their religion got coopted and politicized and economized out of existence. So maybe we’re in the middle of a mission area, sure. But it’s a mission that requires a kind of Christian message we’ve never preached before–here or China or anywhere else.”
Laurie
I don’t have experience with glitzy churches, so I can’t offer up an educated opinion on what they offer. I can offer an opinion on what my hundred-year-old, non-glitzy church offers.
The churches that tend to be glitziest also seem, from what I can see, to be most homogeneous. Same age members, same race, same socioeconomic background. There’s comfort in similarity, and yet…
In our church, on the flip side, some people have been members for thirty, forty, fifty years. We birth ’em, baptize ’em, marry ’em and bury ’em. The kids my husband and I had in youth group fifteen years ago are even starting to return with their own kids.
Where else do people, and especially children, get to interact with others who are completely different and yet bonded by what’s truly important?
Mike the Eyeguy
mmlace–that’s okay, I’m just giving you a hard time; a little accountability is what keeps the ol’ Eyeguy churning out the (*cough*) quality stuff.
You keep thinking over there in LR–but don’t overdo it. I hope you Hawgs finally get something to celebrate over there this weekend. Who are y’all playing? The North Texas Tumbleweeds or some such? Man, I hope you guys win. I don’t want to be reading about riots in the streets of Fayetteville come Sunday morning.
Mike the Eyeguy
JRB–
You correctly point out that the label “emerging church” conceals as much as it reveals. I recall reading an article in Christianity today about 2-3 yrs ago (I found it, but unfortunately it’s only available with subscription now) that described an emerging church conference in Nashville which turned into a cacophony of media seemingly done for media’s sake. I seem to recall the veteran evangelical Os Guinness shaking his head and decrying the lack of substance in that scene.
But just as quickly, as you point out, another group of emergents will just as easily back away from the glitz and glam and pursue small, intimate relationships within “authentic community” and even take a more ancient/future approach, combining traditional liturgical approaches to worship with evocative multimedia and seeking to recast the Christian story in contemporary forms that eschew the jargon of the Christian ghetto.
But here is something that I have noticed–the pursuit of authenticity and depth is not the sole province of young emergents. There are those in their 40s and beyond who are desperately seeking the same things. They are raising their kids in “the system” but all the while wondering whether or not they are passing on the kind of faith that will last. They are thirsting, but often they don’t have the words to express it, or even if they do, are unable, given the stasis of large organizations such as the typical megachurch and the implicit (sometimes explicit) expectation to “shut up, quit complaining, get busy and, oh by the way, open up your wallet.”
Mike the Eyeguy
“Is the age of the Sunday Morning Worship Service coming to an end?”
Not if you’re a patternist! š But for many, the old idea of “showing up and punching your card” is beginning to wear threadbare when it is obvious that so many who do that, showing up in their Sunday best, treat others like crap during the rest of the week.
Better to have both/and–Both sacred space/time and genuine Christian living in what Oswald Chambers called “the mean streets and alleys.” But if push came to shove and I had to choose, I would take the genuine living and “bearing fruit” in a heartbeat.
Mike the Eyeguy
Along that same line, I recently heard a young preacher talk of a time when, I believe it was for multiple children being sick, that his family missed Sunday morning church for the first time in eons. He very honestly described how relaxing it was, how their time spent in personal reflection and prayer, caring for the kids, making and enjoying brunch, drinking coffee, listening to music, reading the paper, etc. was soothing for the soul and seemed very much in keeping with the intent of Sabbath. In sum, they enjoyed being home and finding the face of God within the natural rhythm of domesticity.
Just an observation, but I often have often found the “Sunday Morning Drill” so harried and distracting that I can’t settle and focus my mind on God once I get there and I end up thinking: And the point of that was what exactly?
I spend my week going to meetings and taking in and sorting through massive amounts of verbiage and information. Sometimes (often, actually) church seems like just another meeting.
JRB–I had read that JTB quote earlier this week, but thanks for pointing it out again. She’s a sharp cookie, and I enjoy her honest, straightforward tact. No polite Southern “runaround” there!
Mike the Eyeguy
JRB–I’m envious of you and your run around the Capstone. Perhaps a few more laps, and the “old love” will return, eh?
I like the ‘Dores chances this weekend. And the Tide’s too.
Mike the Eyeguy
Laurie–
Your description of worshiping in a 100-year-old church with the mixing of multiple generations and socioeconomic levels leaves me with a touch of envy!
Part of the problem with the consumer-oriented megachurch is the segregation of generations and demographic groups (not to mention the trend toward lily-whiteness). There are so many opportunities for fellowshipping and mentoring that are passed over when the generations don’t mix. But yet, the surveys and focus groups say this is what people want, so this is what they get.
Mike the Eyeguy
Laurie–
On a soccer note, alas, our Yankettes lost to Brazil. What was Ryan thinking going with Scurry over Solo in goal? I saw the same tendency with Bruce Arena last year–going with veterans who have lost a step over young blood. I would hope that he was thinking there was some tactical advantage to that, but I’m afraid he was too clever by half. I think Solo (although she should probably have held her tongue) said it best– “It’s not 2004 anymore.”
No, and it’s certainly not 1999 either.
(Here’s Mike Lopresti’s take)
Mike the Eyeguy
Fifty or bust, people.
mmlace
QUALITY,
mmlace
INDEED
mmlace
DR.
mmlace
EYEGUY!
mmlace
As I said, I tend to at least see the good purpose that trying to draw people in serves. Our church offers some things that might be seen as just that…but in my opinion are more than just that, because they also serve to encourage people to build some of those real, intimate relationships in a casual setting.
So is the age of the Sunday Morning Worship Service coming to an end? I certainly hope not! Rather, I hope that as we really do seek to form an “authentic community,” that our worship services will be a blessed time of worship with those we love, not “just another meeting,” not just business as usual.
I think I like the way reJoyce put it: “I suppose Iād rather have people coming to my church because theyāve heard we really follow Jesus, rather than for a light show. But, on the other hand, if weāre really following Jesus, I donāt know that a light show is necessarily a bad thing. I donāt think Iād want it if that was all there was though.”
So there…that’s why I’m on the fence…it’s not necessarily a bad thing, we just have to be careful of how we use such tactics and that we don’t rely on them completely…lest, as you said, we miss out on the strong foundation of faith necessary to face this world.
mmlace
I fear for Fayetteville as well, if we lose to North Texas!
Brady
To help the numbers: I disagree.
Mike the Eyeguy
“So thereā¦thatās why Iām on the fenceā¦itās not necessarily a bad thing, we just have to be careful of how we use such tactics and that we donāt rely on them completelyā¦lest, as you said, we miss out on the strong foundation of faith necessary to face this world.”
Well put, mmlace. Yes, so that we don’t rely on them completely (substituting milk for meat), and in the process, fail to produce disciples-in-the-trenches, even among those who have gone to church all their lives.
Mike the Eyeguy
Brady–Your conciseness and clarity never fail to astound. If “brevity is the soul of wit,” then you are the wittiest of them all!
Mike the Eyeguy
And let me say this just to
clear things upfurther muddy the waters:As many problems as the overly-consumerized version of AmericanChrisitanity has, here’s an old truth to ponder:
Something is better than nothing.
The trick is holding all these disparate elements, the wheat and tares, in perpetual tension.
reJoyce
44 comments! Wow. Oh, and you’re right, I’m not really that much of a lurker. I was going for effect but got busted. Oh well. š
Mike wrote: “I recently heard a young preacher talk of a time when, I believe it was for multiple children being sick, that his family missed Sunday morning church for the first time in eons. He very honestly described how relaxing it was, how their time spent in personal reflection and prayer, caring for the kids, making and enjoying brunch, drinking coffee, listening to music, reading the paper, etc. was soothing for the soul and seemed very much in keeping with the intent of Sabbath.”
Along those same lines, we’ve recently moved to a new area and have not been going to bible class but showing up for church at 10:30. We’ll eventually get back into going, but it is very interesting to me how much more relaxed and worshipful I feel when I get there at 10:30 after having time to putt around, enjoy some coffee and fellowship with my family before we go. This is, I know, in part because I’m not a morning person. But, it’s also because I feel so much less harried by the time we arrive than I have in all the years of attending bible class.
Mike the Eyeguy
reJoyce–
Here’s another one along the same line. Recently, I had spent several hours preparing a lesson for my Sunday school class. But due to various meetings/luncheons/”this or that” taking place simultaneously most of the class was gone. That left about 5-6 of us. At first I was a little miffed–good grief, don’t all these people who plan “this or that” know how much I put into this?
But then I decided to ditch the lesson and instead our very micro-small group sat, drank coffee, and discussed family, world events, and various topics related to Christian-life-in-the-trenches. It was liberating–and uplifting–to simply “just be” rather than having to kowtow to the constant pressure to “do something significant.”
There’s a lesson there somewhere.
dr. J
Eyeguy!
OUCH!!!!!! You hit me where I live!
This question is interesting in light of your recent post about finding God’s grace in unusual places (a joke, a commercial). Could God not be found in pyrotechnics and scintillating key board play? Possible, but it may be that what concerns many folks is the emphasis on the methods and not the content. It could be argued that this emphasis is the history of religion, however and that method over content has led to religion’s current disheveled state in relation to our culture. Method over content is, and has always been, a losing strategy when it comes to reaching people; witness Ananias and Sapphira.
That said, however, churches that use the glitz to accent their content are making inroads. And it can not be denied that those who communicate through the culture have a better shot with people than those who insist on culture coming to them. We would snicker at a missionary who planned on going to a foreign country without making a commitment to learn the language of the area. We should not think it strange therefore, that we need to adjust our mediums of communication in our pluralistic society.
This begs another question then, “What does it mean to go to church?” and/or “How much is too much?” but this current comment is already grossly too long, and I have perched myself firming but uncomfortably atop the proverbial fence. (possibly replacing an earlier commentator).
Keep asking questions, Eyeguy.
greg
“But then I decided to ditch the lesson… …’just be’ rather than having to kowtow to the constant pressure to ādo something significant.ā
I’ve read of churches doing more of this. I actually read an article last year about a church in Cullman (perhaps you’ve heard about it) that was meeting at a coffee shop or restaurant every week.
I figure there needs to be a balance (not ditching preparation and teaching altogether, of course), but I think it’s good to have time to “just be” here and there. Often this is accomplished in the small group setting, I suppose. However, I wonder if it would happen more – or at least be more beneficial when it did – if our churches were not so large to begin with and didn’t have so many programs and activities to take up our time.
Mike the Eyeguy
dr. J
My main point in the whole “Mac” theme is to point out that using the same glitz and glam marketing as McDonald’s runs the risk of producing the same result–a menu that is very attractive and tasty (although that could be argued) but not very nourishing. If by “inroads being made” you mean getting getting the “unchurched” or “seekers” into the building, or providing a place to hang out, do the church thing, raise your kids up the way you were raised, then, yes, you’re correct (of course, your typical McDonald’s is always going to have a crowd too). But what then? Continue the “light fare” or do we teach them to appreciate richer, more nourishing items on the menu?
You can certainly survive on junk food. But that’s not the same as truly living. And it’s not the same as surviving (and even thriving) when the rubber meets the road and life’s crisis test our Christianity in the extreme.
But you’re right–this is a very old question. When you get right down to it, the real Gospel is a hard dish to swallow, and always has been.
Mike the Eyeguy
“However, I wonder if it would happen more – or at least be more beneficial when it did – if our churches were not so large to begin with and didnāt have so many programs and activities to take up our time.”
Greg, for some reason the melody to John Lennon’s “Imagine” started running through my mind when I read that. š
Hey, that’s 50! But don’t let that stop you…
mmlace
50 comments! Most impressive! Make that 51!
JRB
Jumping back to our “emerging church” discussion (sorry, I’ve been on the road).
You said, “But here is something that I have noticedāthe pursuit of authenticity and depth is not the sole province of young emergents. There are those in their 40s and beyond who are desperately seeking the same things.”
Of course, people have always wanted this and want it still, because we are created to want it. The difference, here and now, I reckon is that the generations preceding the Boomers felt compelled by custom and culture to be part of this system, then the Boomers continue to be compelled by some mixture of guilt and fear. The Busters, Xers, Yers and Millenials are harder to hold with traditional guilt and fear, especially with a lot more competition for their spiritual wares in the marketplace.
The end of that observation, whereas most churches have not done a very good job of fostering genuine, deliberate community (although often organic, accidental and fleeting community), the numbers and participation didn’t change much because folks felt obligated to be there. We are seeing now a loss of that obligation and a desire for calling. If the church can provide the calling and the community, we are convinced this generation will be there, because this generation is seeking Jesus. They’re just not so keen on church.
Mike the Eyeguy
“The difference, here and now, I reckon is that the generations preceding the Boomers felt compelled by custom and culture to be part of this system, then the Boomers continue to be compelled by some mixture of guilt and fear.”
I reckon that’s a pretty fair assessment. And among Boomers, there is this unspoken fear that “if we do something different” like, maybe alter the system drastically, or drop out altogether, then our children will grow up and become stark raving atheists (hence the perpetual maintenance of the overwrought, bells and whistles, activity-filled youth group system). Of course, that sometimes happens anyway, but more likely, they’ll simply leave the system and seek spirituality, community and authenticity in other forms and venues.
The other thing is that there are still a lot of the WWII/Korea folks and older Boomers around (with lots of money) who have a vested interest in keeping things the same. At the same time, a church also feels obligated to make a home for the emergents as well. Tough task.
I’m presently on a committee interviewing candidates for a college minister/young professional minister. I’ve noticed that nearly all of them have recognized your observation that emergents are “not so keen on church.” It’s interesting to hear how they have handled that and their plans for the future. I think “church” is going to look a lot different 30 years from now.
dr. J
Eyeguy,
I hear you (I hope), and you’re correct in that we can not be simply numbers oriented – we can’t just concern our selves with getting numbers in the door. What is the church’s role for the mature believer? As with raising our kids, does there come a point where the church must just “let us go” and we develop ourselves? I am not suggesting non-attendance, but it may be that the church can only do so much for me at that point of maturity. This is a new thought for me, and I am still weighing the implications.
JRB
Will you please email me some information about that post and your process? I have a candidate in mind and am always looking for opportunities to be the instrument of Providence.
Mike the Eyeguy
dr. J–that is an interesting thought with interesting implications.
JRB–I emailed you.