Attractional vs. missional
I have a question regarding the "attractional" model of church vs. a more "missional" model. I used to be pretty caught up in the whole "seeker sensitive" frenzy, where we did all kinds of things just to try to attract people to our Sunday service. I think others have done a good job of showing how that model does nothing but create consumers of our church hoppers, and doesn't really do a lot in the way of helping to make disciples. But sometimes I think our attempts to be more missionally minded leave us going almost too far the other way in our evangelistic pursuits, and we can make no effort at reaching out to people with the idea of hopefully seeing them connect with a church someday. Does anyone else struggle with this?
For example, I had a newspaper reporter ask to interview me (as a pastor), and I declined for various reasons, but mostly because I didn't want it to be one of those "see how great our church is, and why you should come to it" type of things. I finally agreed to have the reporter do an article on the picnic shelter and playground we built for the community. I thought this would be a good opportunity for people to see that it was available for them to use (and free of charge, btw), and at the same time it might be a good way to help change some people's minds about the church in general. To help them see that the church is actually here to serve and bless our communities, rather than just take from them or ask them to come to our places and give us their money. But now that I've done the interview, I'm not at all confident that is going to come through.
Anyway, I just wondered if anyone had any thoughts on this. Or any ideas on how we, as the church, can be evangelical but without doing things to simply attract a crowd to our services. Do you know of anyone that does a good job of this? Any examples of good or bad? Anything???
posted by dan at 9:54 AM
7 Comments:
Please note that I changed "going too far in our evangelistic pursuits" to "going too far THE OTHER WAY in our evangelistic pursuits."
Has anyone looked at what Andy Stanley does at Northpoint in Atlanta? He has a unique 3-stage view of making disciples, based on three environments of the home. Taking people from the "foyer" envioronment (Sunday morning service) where you don't go deep into touchy subjects, to the "livingroom" environment where you spend quality time and really get to know people, to the "kitchen" environment where you're the closest of friends and can discuss and act on the truly life-changing topics.
I think they get knocked for having a "seeker-friendly" type service (their foyer environment) but a friend of mine has read some of Andy's books and even attended a workshop there, and he says they're simply not content with allowing people to stay in that environment, but actively draw them through the other two. I don't know a lot about what they're teaching, but they seem to be wholly committed to this plan, rejecting any program or activity that doesn't accomplish this forward motion in people's lives.
Is it possible that we've come to expect the Sunday service to carry too much of the weight of making disciples? Are we asking it to effect more life change than is possible in that environment? Is it possible that we don't see major spiritual growth in people because we aren't set up to give them the one-to-one attention that is necessary?
Oops. I think I misunderstood Dan's question about what others are doing. Didn't mean to take it off topic.
john,
i recently read stanley's 7 practices of effective ministry, and would recommend it with only a little critique. the ideas he presents there are generally good, though occasionally it goes a little to church-as-business for my taste. but the general ideas are quality, using simple problem-solving ideas and being very goal-focused, namely making disciples (though from an engineering background i'm surprised i haven't heard more of this kind of thinking before). read it with discernment and an open mind.
while i very much agree that the majority of life change will happen in smaller, more tight-knit groups, i wouldn't want to back away from potentially hard-hitting truth in a service, be it in the sermon or elsewhere. both in my personal experience and hearing about it elsewhere, a lot of people, especially my age, are looking for a faith with meat to it, with answers to tough questions and not being wishy-washy about bitter pills. many people are looking for someone willing to take a stand and state plainly what they believe instead of dancing around an issue like hell or predestination or the cross. as has been shown elsewhere, what brings people in is what's going to keep them, whether that's a feel-good message and a "great service", or something that feels religious and steeped in tradition without substance, or deep Truth and true Christian love.
i guess what i'm trying to say is, yes we should put large amounts of attention and effort into discipleship in one-on-one or small group scenarios, but don't go watering down (and i know that's charged language) your large group gatherings in order to get people in the door.
Good points, Walt. I checked out the link and am encouraged to see that hunger for truth.
I'm fairly new to the ministry, so I'm trying to really take a hard look at everything and see if it's a) true to what has been demonstrated/prescribed in Scripture and b) actually accomplishing what it's intended to accomplish. I'd never advocate watering down the Gospel (and I know you weren't implying that) but I do wonder if this thing that we've come to call "church" is really what Christ intended when He established His Body. Again, that's a product of my trying to take nothing for granted and scrutinize everything as closely as possible.
I sat in a revival service last night. The sermon was good. The truth was preached. It was received, understood and affirmed by lots of people, in typical revival fashion. Yet, I know that there were some there who had no history in church. No foundation for the message that was preached. Which leads me to wonder if the one-on-one stuff is best used to help manage the misunderstandings that may arise from that type of encounter, or if it is more effective to use the main service to open doors in people's lives where the more in-depth stuff can take place in the small group/one-to-one setting.
Obviously, the Holy Spirit can and does open people's eyes in situations like this, I don't want to diminish that at all. However, I just wonder how many people come to a service like the one I was in and think "I don't get this, but everyone else does. I don't fit in here".
Maybe the answer lies in putting together messages that address both the churched and the relatively unchurched.
Maybe I'm rambling. :)
BTW: I've lurked here for a long time and have immensely enjoyed and been challenged by the discussion here. Please keep it up!
John (and Walt),
I appreciate the comments. I don't know that it's off topic at all. I didn't really know what I was looking for. Anything, I guess. So thanks for chiming in.
I have read Andy Stanley's "Creating Community" - which I believe explains his 3-stage view pretty good. My problem is... I'm not Andy Stanley, our church isn't near as big as his, and we don't have the people or resources he has to do what he does. Certainly there was helpful information in the book, but being in a small rural church just doesn't compute with some of that.
I think you guys are both hitting on what I am struggling with though. I do think what we do at our Sunday gatherings (or whenever they are) is important; and it shouldn't be wishy-washy. But I don't know that we can count on that for discipleship anymore (if we ever could). What about the people who will never attend a worship service?
David Fitch has some interesting reading on this at his blog: http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/, regarding "When they will not come."
Also, thanks for finally jumping into the comments, John.
Speaking of Fitch, I'm reading his book right now - The Great Giveaway. Good recommended reading for the types of conversations we're interested in here.
Post a Comment
<< Home