The Downside of Seeker Services
Downside #1 -- Worship Deprioritization
The old model of seeker service emphasized provided an introduction to Christianity. Traditional church language and symbols were left out of the service and the messages stayed on a pretty introductory level. The idea was that once people came to know Jesus they would move to a "real" worship service. (Places such as Willow Creek have always distinguished between their seeker services and their worship services. The difference between the two not being a matter of style (traditional vs contemporary) but of content.) But what they found was that people found a home in the event through which they entered the church and they tended not to move. The result was large numbers of Christian infants who were not being challenged to grow in their discipleship.
Christian maturity and long-term commitment to outreach are ultimately dependent on the worship life of the congregation. What is gained in the short term may ultimately be forfeited when worship is allowed to slip into a number-two or lower position.
Downside #2: Seeker Events Equal Worship
. . . Christian worship is not only offering all that we are to a Holy God (spirit). It is an intentional response of praise, thanksgiving, and adoration to The God, the One revealed in the Word, made known and accessible to us in Jesus Christ and witnessed in our hearts through the Holy Spirit (truth).
Worship is not education or introduction but rather it is "God's service (to us) and our service to God." True worship requires a way in which we can respond to the love that God has given to us. In fact, the three terms most often used for worship in Scripture all indicate that we must DO something in order to worship: shachah (to bow down, to do homage); proskuneo (to kiss toward); and latreuo (to service, minister.
The fact is, great musical performances, thought-provoking drama, toucing testimonies, relevant messages, and apologetics about God and faith are wonderful tools God can use to touch the seeker's mind and heart. Notice, however, that their operation does not hinge on any sort of movement or response from those in attendance. . . Spectator worship has always been and will always be an oxymoron.
According to Morgenthaller the litmus test for worship is transformation--when people worship they are transformed both internally and externally and that only happens when our worship costs us something meaningful and valuable.
And finally she points out that only worshippers can lead in worship! That means those of us leading worship and even those who participate in worship through music leadership or even those who wil assist in the start of this new service by being present to create a critical mass must be worshippers ourselves!
2 comments:
Sherill, I am reading
For The Beauty of the Earth - A Christian Vision For Creation Care by Steven Bouma-Prediger. Very interesting read. Apparently Christianity is responsible for the environmental state of the world. THe book explores the actual enviornemtal problem we are in, and explores the tenents of the anti-christian conservationalists arguements. I hate to say it, but their arguments have some merit. But, we as the church need to be on the fore-front of finding solutions for our culture, not reacting at glacial pace to social problems.
I have another good question for you. I was reading in the Ocracoke, NC paper this morning (Yes, the lowe family is on vacation this week). It described a bar church in Norfolk, VA. The article stated that the leaders of the church are striving for cultural relevance as opposed to relgious perfection?
Are these two goals in opposition? Which are we supposed to pursue?
For the Beauty of the Earth sounds like a fascinating read! My immediate response is to say that Christians have been at fault in the environmental state of the world. Some CHristian theology even encourages viewing the earth as a throw away and our role as guardians of the world is a role of domination and use for our own means rather than stewardship of God's creation.
As for the bar church, I would say the Wesleyan answer is that we must strive for religious perfection but that doesn't mean that we ignore cultural relevance (for instance Charles Wesley put his hymns to known folk (some say bar) tunes). Our Bishop would say that religious perfection (in the Wesleyan sense of loving God and our neighbor as ourselves) is our main responsibility and that we have no responsibility to be culturally relevant.
I think it is not either/or but a both/and with pursuing our relationship with God as an important goal for each Christian and each Christian community. But we also have a mandate to share the gospel that requires us to be culturally relevant in order to communicate and persuade.
Thanks for the thought provoking questions!
Post a Comment