“What Church Will Be Like in 50 years.”

Recently, I ran across an article that had some predictions about what church will be like 50 years from now, on a website called “Church for Men” (see the link at the bottom of this post).  I found the contents of that article absolutely appalling — do people really buy into this??  Some of you saw and commented on the article when I posted it on Facebook — and I had so many things I wanted to say, I decided to add some comments of my own here. Here we go…

• First of all, a website called “Church for Men”?  I understand the need the site is trying to meet, but something like this just feeds into the unhelpful gender divide that is already present in large pockets of the evangelical church.
• The post accepts trends happening outside of the church (e.g. large corporations buying out mom-and-pop shops) uncritically.  Not only does the author assume no difference between how business works and how the church works, he seems to see no reason to push back against the trend toward church “megatization.”
• The author assumes that the purpose of the church is to “meet people’s needs” (see the first paragraph).  I would argue this is a gross (though popular) distortion of ecclesiology.
• As someone who helps to pastor a “midsize congregation”, I strongly object to his analysis of these “family churches.”  I think that smaller congregations offer some things that megachurches do not, and perhaps can not. Midsize churches have been around a lot longer than megachurches, and I don’t think they are going away anytime soon.
• I object to his assertion that megachurches offer “superior preaching, music, and programming.”  In this assertion, the author reveals some assumptions that I would challenge — for one thing, the assumption that preaching is the most important part of the service, that big contemporary worship bands (I assume) are the best way to worship, and that the church is supposed to offer “programs” for its members. In our church, we have intentionally avoided creating programs, instead letting our ministries flow out of the gifts and skills of our members, as well as what God is doing in our particular congregation.
• I do understand his point about midsize congregations becoming encumbered by properties, and losing members to megachurches.  However, there are ways for smaller churches to adapt as well — renting space, for example (which is what we do).  As for losing members to megachurches… well, small church takes work and contributions from each part of the congregation, and when folks aren’t willing to step up and share the load, it can become easier to seek out a church where the staff does the work.
• Satellite campuses — I really don’t like satellite campuses, because they are so impersonal.  I believe that preaching and worship are to be shaped (though not determined) by particular congregations — when a pastor doesn’t know his or her people, I think the preaching can suffer.  If preaching is intended to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable,” a pastor better know a bit about the members of the congregation!  Now, certainly God can (and does) speak through impersonal sermons — but in my opinion, there’s no substitute for actually knowing your people.
• His analogy between Walmart and megachurches disturbs me.  Consumerism, anyone? Why do churches need to swallow up other God-honoring churches?
• I think satellite churches give too much power to the preaching/peaching pastor.  And I don’t think that’s helpful for anyone, least of all for the pastor him/herself!
• I also don’t think denominations are going anywhere.  I think they exist for valuable purposes, and give theological shape that is necessary for faith.  Granted, all these divisions between us aren’t helpful, and there is room to learn from one another — but worship in a church in Evanston, IL will not — and SHOULD NOT — look the same as worship in a church in Kigali, Rwanda.  I think the same is true in the states — different kinds of worship are ok, because no one style of worship can express everything about God!  So yes, let’s learn from one another, but let’s also accept that these traditions are not just old things to be jettisoned, but foundations that can help us encounter and serve God.
• As someone on Facebook pointed out, there is waaaaay too much emphasis on skilled (male) preachers in this argument.
• How could he use the phrase “McDonalds-ization of the church” as a good thing??? Consistent quality, yes — but not GOOD quality!  I think that analogy says the wrong thing about God.
• As a friend at church once said, “efficiency is not a kingdom value.”
• Does this article lean toward idolization of the sermon (and therefore the preacher)?  Obviously the author is not part of a tradition that emphasizes Sacrament alongside Word.
• I won’t even get into the author’s assumption that pastors and preachers are to be male.
• Where is the Spirit in this article?
• I agree that there is a strong need for pastors who are truly pastors — but I don’t think that has to be (or should be) a separate category from “preachers”.
• I also agree that it is a good thing for laypeople to step up and help in ministry — although I disagree that this will automatically follow from the mega-tization of the church.
• I am highly suspicious of the author’s assertion that “for men, sermon quality is paramount.”

I could go on.  I know that God works through megachurches as well as small churches, but I am tired of the highly-American assumptions that bigger is better, that efficiency is a virtue, that Christians are church “consumers” while churches are supposed to “meet people’s needs,” that preaching is a superior calling to all of the other gifts given by the Spirit, and that business trends ought to shape the church.

So there you have it.  If this analysis resonates with you, or if you think I have misunderstood the article at any point, please comment!

http://churchformen.com/teaching-in-the-church/what-church-will-be-like-in-50-years/

I am preaching tonight. I just printed off the hard copy of my sermon, which is always a relief!

This is the first sermon I’ve preached in church that is completely new material — the only other sermon I’ve given so far (last Thanksgiving) drew heavily from a sermon I wrote for a seminary class. So I’m excited — but also nervous.

You see, this sermon will not be a “textbook” sermon. I was trained in an (über-) evangelical seminary that has VERY strong opinions/beliefs about what makes a good sermon — or even what makes a “real” sermon. In two words: consecutive exposition. Line-by-line exegesis of the biblical text. A clear outline, with a clear “proposition” offered, preferably at the beginning of the sermon. Each main point anchored in the text, backed up with illustrations and explanation. Highly linear.

Well, I just couldn’t force my sermon into that kind of rhetorical corset this time around. Part of me wanted to — the part that says, “People will judge you if you don’t give a technically excellent sermon — especially since you’re a girl.” I’m still a bit scared that I will be dismissed tonight because my sermon is more fluid than linear.

But I just couldn’t do it. My sense is that what God wants to do tonight, through the texts, music, liturgy, and sermon, is to move the congregation — for the significance of good Friday to sink into hearts, not just enter into minds. You see, sometimes exegesis keeps us at a distance, comfortably removed from the text, under the illusion that we can approach God objectively and cognitively. But God wants more than (though not less than) our minds.

My congregation is well educated and well churched. And that’s good! But it can also numb us to the impact events like Good Friday ought to have on our hearts. So tonight, I’m taking a risk — and I pray that God will use it.

Link to my sermon

In case anyone is interested, here’s a link to the sermon I recently gave:

Thanksgiving Day sermon

Will this be me in 40 years?

So I’m preaching today — T-minus 2 hours and counting.

This will be the first time I have ever preached for a church, preached for anyone outside of an artificial “preaching lab” setting. In some ways, I’m less nervous since I’m not preaching for a grade! Seminarians are often the harshest critics when it comes to sermons…

That being said, I’m still nervous — especially because I’m supposed to limit the sermon to 15 minutes, tops. Since I hate practicing sermons, I haven’t read it out loud, so I actually have no idea how long it will turn out to be… I suspect it’s too long. That probably means I will end up talking too fast, as I usually do. 🙂

However, fundamentally I’m excited! I get to preach! Plus, my family’s here to celebrate Thanksgiving with me and the in-laws to be (!), so my family will be in the congregation to hear my very first sermon. I’ve already decided that my sermon won’t be “perfect,” and it’s certainly not your typical “three points and poem” sermon (since I’m NOT a linear thinking type of person…), but I’m still excited.

The process of writing the sermon has been quite freeing, actually. A lot of the ground work for my sermon was handed to me, because it “just so happens” that the lectionary passages for the day include TWO — that’s right, not just one, but TWO — passages that I have already studied in depth recently. I taught on the Gospel passage in our Sunday School a few weeks ago, and the Psalm for the day is the exact Psalm on which I preached last Spring for a seminary class. Oh that God… It feels like He’s smiling on me in this process.

In fact, this sermon is part and parcel with much of what God is teaching me right now: trust in Him and not in myself. I’ve had the strangest sense of peace (well, most of the time) as I’ve prepared for this sermon, and it’s not because I’ve spent billions of hours preparing (I haven’t). But for some reason, I have been able to trust God with this sermon. And that’s pretty darn cool.

On my own, I’m not capable of this type of trust. So…. thanks be to God for His care for me!