RT @TWERadio: Vanderbilt University stands firm against campus-ministry groups 
Click to Print
Include Comments
Why she walked out of church
WORLD’s recent cover story on NextGen worship inspired Julie R. Neidlinger, a single, 34-year-old writer/artist from North Dakota, to post the following on her LonePrairie.net site:
The cover photo alone enraged me, with the pastor wearing baggy jeans and untucked button-up shirt with flip flops and an ear microphone. Later, the same guy is shown out front of a church holding a paper Starbucks-like cup of coffee. Could he try any harder to be lame?
I’d have liked to have taken that cup of coffee and dumped it on his head. But it’s nothing personal against that guy or his beliefs or sincerity. It’s an anger at something else.
I’m not going to be one of those starched-collar Christians who, based on personal preference, say that this is a sign we’re going to hell in a handbasket and that all things are wrong unless they are done as they were with the Puritans. What I’m saying is that I can’t stand the phoniness, or trendiness, or sameness — or whatever I’m trying to say here — that the church seems to catch onto at the tail end, not even aware of how lame it is. The fact that this is not only actually successful in appealing to people, but attracts them, also disgusts me.
It makes me want to throw up.
It’s buying into some kind of lie or substitution of cool culture as being relevant when it isn’t.
If I see another cool Bible college student or pastoral studies major wearing the hemp choker necklace, flip-flops, open-at-the-collar shirt that’s untucked, and baggy jeans, saying words like “dude” and “sweet”, I will kick their … . It’s like the Christian version of annoying hipsters, an overly-studied and homogenized “with-it” faux coolness.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there are a lot of Julie Neidlingers out there trying to avoid all the trendiness and looking instead to “find just a small group of people and meet and talk about our beliefs and struggles and study the Bible and connect on a real level, and let that be church.” Maybe the evangelical church should listen more to the Julies of this world instead of demographic and marketing studies. Then, maybe they’ll keep people like her who are looking for spiritual depth from walking out the back door.
Go here to read the entire article, and if you’re like me, you’ll be compelled to read every last word.
back to top96 Comments to “Why she walked out of church”
That woman is inside my head!
Report comment to moderator
That is EXACTLY how I feel about the whole Rebelution/Do Hard Things some young wannabe’s seem to be trying to sell us. They want it to be about THEMSELVES.
Report comment to moderator
It’s so good to know that I’m not alone. I left a mainstream denomination a couple of years ago because it’s attitude was becoming more that of social workers than worshipers, but I’ve been unable to find a church like the one Julie’s looking for.
Another group that’s often overlooked is the one I belong to: older singles. No, make that “old singles.” Once in a while I’ve come across a church that has special service for us old folks, but I’m not interested in being placed in a corner. I want to be part of the regular service, but I want that service to remember that it’s not just made up of young families. I want the minister to look like he’s an adult [no matter what his age], and I want the sermons to be Scriptural, not just ones that use a line of Scripture to make the secular point the minister wants to make.
I’m still looking.
Report comment to moderator
Chapman55k
How much do you know about “Do Hard Things?”
Report comment to moderator
I am from Portland, originally, have followed Josh Harris and “I Kissed Dating Goodbye” (which I thought was started out well, but finished poorly), have heard a good number of interviews by the boys, know they are going to Patrick Henry, am a homeschool father and have seen the influence of the boys on that movement, etc., etc. I have read some of the book. How much do you know?
Report comment to moderator
“We’ve taught kids and youth to expect to be entertained and now we are in a vicious cycle on how to up the quotient and keep their attention. This is magnified and made even more ugly in a church setting when we try to find a way to insert the gospel into this machine of age segregation.”
She is really gifted at pointing out the unintended consequences of the modern church structure. “Drawing a crowd” is understandable–the leaders want to get the Gospel to as many as possible. Yet, the seeker approach encourages a shallowness in many cases that this author was nailing as a major concern.
What a great article!
Report comment to moderator
Kayvee — I’m with you. “A minister who looks like an adult.”
Of course, the only thing that was missing in the picture was the bald head. At least around here, there is the fashion of shaving the head. Since I lost my own hair rather early, this trend leaves me — well, scratching my head.
Report comment to moderator
Behind these trends lurks a certain lack of honor and respect that is on the increase among some young adults. Nevertheless, I don’t mind the forms (dress, styles, etc.) so much as I mind it when the meaning of the gospel is diminished or neglected for the sake of “reaching out” to a particular group. For example, I hear many more ‘hip’ talks with little to no reference to scripture than ever before in my life. I hear impassioned please for more “passion” and to make that appeal, the speaker often feels impelled to seriously disparage “reason.” I hear imaginative messages praising “imagination” by bashing “doctrine” and (heaven forbid) “living out of the head.”
In other words, there is a “dichotomy disease” at play out there that reflects the same mindlessness that these speakers are seeking to encourage in their hearers.
Report comment to moderator
What a bitter woman. I attended a church last year that had a head pastor that was “hip,” and although I’m personally more comfortable with a more traditional service (the old hymns, formal attire, etc) there are unsaved people out there who would not darken the door of the church I now attend.
Praise God for ministers who are willing to reach out to all types of people.
Report comment to moderator
Kayvee,
I don’t suppose you live near Louisville, KY, or Greenville, SC?
Report comment to moderator
If our pastor wore baggy jeans and an untucked open-at-the-collar shirt in order to appear “cool” and trendy, I’d be turned off. But if he comes to the Saturday evening service dressed in comfortable but not baggy jeans and an untucked open-at-the-collar shirt and sandals because that’s normal dress for a lot of people on a Saturday evening and he sees no theological reason why people need to be especially dressed up for church, I have no problem with it.
On Sunday mornings he dresses somewhat more traditionally, although I’ve never seen him in a suit except for a wedding or funeral (and in the slideshow of his thirty years at the church). The worship pastor is more casual even on Sundays, almost always in jeans but sometimes they don’t have holes in them. He doesn’t do it to be trendy or cool either, he does it because that’s how he dresses and he sees no reason why he should dress differently to serve God during church services than he does to serve God the rest of the week.
And that’s basically the leadership board’s approach to the matter. Some people still like to dress more traditionally. Enough people dress in a variety of ways that no visitor is likely to feel he sticks out for being dressed either too formally or too casually.
Perhaps Julie Neidlinger wouldn’t like our church. But I think if she stuck around long enough to get to know people she’d find out that despite the jeans, T-shirts, and coffee cups (styrofoam, not paper), the church is not about trendiness or phoniness, but about people getting together and talking about their lives and their struggles and what God is doing and how they can serve God.
Last year the leadership board was concerned over a sense that the church was getting to be “a mile wide and an inch deep.” (I would guess this is more due to the membership having grown rapidly in recent years once they moved to a larger facility, than in the clothing or music style.) The approach they took had nothing to do with how people dress or the music or other outward things. They started two weekly open-to-everyone times of prayer for revival (fasting also was recommended), followed by a churchwide study on repentance and revival, then small groups continuing the same study.
No doubt there are shallow, phony churches that look similar on the outside to this church. But I’m glad I didn’t write this church off when I first visited based on assumptions about why they do things the way they do.
Report comment to moderator
The author is right. Christians are always trying to be part of “the latest thing”, and they’re always about 10 years late to the party. This whole “search for authenticity” is as phony as the leisure suited Baptist preacher of the 70s. There’s nothing authentic about it.
Report comment to moderator
NextGen Churches are linked with “The Emergent Church” Erwin McManus and Rick Warren -
Report comment to moderator
One factor is that the age group that is least likely to be in church in America today is 21-35. Attempts to reverse that trend sometimes leads to over-reactions (by church leaders and pastors) against more traditional styles. Some of this is healthy but we must never forget that this process must eventually call for (generations) meeting each other half-way.
Report comment to moderator
There is a lot of wheat mixed in with chaff in her essay. There is some stuff that is challenging as I teach my youth to be men and women of God. But I agree with Outkast that there is a lot of bitterness. Time has past her by.
There is no church in America, including her old church, that can compete with her memories of her old church.
As for our churches, the challenge is how do we train our young men to be men of God in their hearts and minds. Then we can stress out a lot less over the clothes they’re wearing and why.
Report comment to moderator
No, Cameron [#10], I’m in Northern San Diego, the home of “NextGen” churches
Dad of 5: Julie’s point, and mine, is that many of today’s churches are so concerned with reaching out to the younger generation that they ignore the older generation. What’s so hard about reaching out for the rest of us? I live in a community where most folks are older Christians who no longer go to church. Not because they’re too old to drive anymore, but because the churches in this area no longer find us relevant.
Report comment to moderator
Kayvee: The reality is that there are a variety of churches who reach out to all types of demographics, and it’s bitterness that caused this lady to attack the motives of this one particular church based simply on the apparel of the minister.
Report comment to moderator
Hey folks. The World is winning. Has been for 500 years or so. Not quickly, not always, but inexorably.
There are lots of excuses not to go to church and pray and exercise one’s spirtuality. I just never thought that fellow parishioners in flip-flops would be one of them.
As for the older folks like Kayvee, the reason you don’t feel relevant is probably the same reason you probably don’t go in for all these new-fangled sodas and energy drinks. You are not a monetarily valuable customer who can be counted on for 30 or 40 years. So why bother marketing to you and keeping you happy?
Of course I suppose a smart church would try harder to attact you anyway–there’s always the possibility of a bequest…
I know the Catholics were always pretty good at that.
Report comment to moderator
Frankly, she seems bitter about some person, a small group, or perhaps an entire church where she’s had some difficult experience that she has not matured enough to deal with yet even though she is of the opinion that she’s well beyond that point. It seems she’s not sure who this is, or is unwilling to identify for some reason, because no one is spared her wrath and as a result she dumps on “large churches” generally and the normal subparts within specifically.
She doesn’t like youth programs or young people, particularly males, because of their “here we are now entertain us” attitude, but forgets that is a condition of society generally and not of just church attendees. She’d be hard pressed to find otherwise in some other organization as seriously focused on the problems of youth and their needs as they move into adulthood. That is, one that isn’t primarily focused on a sport, recreational social activity, or other distraction beside dealing with/attaining/achieving maturity—spiritual or otherwise.
In one phrase, she’s all over the separation of age groups for age appropriate study saying that the single unified service is better and then in the next she’s all over a family oriented focus because single people are left out—forgetting that a unified service would be seated by families and the message oriented toward, and understandable by, families. Pastors are savvy enough to understand that any message focused too far one way or the other on the age appropriate intellectual/interest scale will lose a significant portion of the audience. As a result they primarily work the middle touching on both ends only occasionally. From her this generates a response of “I’ve pretty much had it.”
I’d guess she really doesn’t fit because the church hasn’t made a slot just for her—which she doesn’t want—or that suits all her various requirements. And yet, she “hate[s] to church hop” and doesn’t “want to waste my time here going from one church to the next” to find what it is she’s seeking. I wish her luck with that if she’s unwilling to look.
I guess home is where the heart is and she should return—if she can.
Report comment to moderator
A few very random thoughts:
Do we use our freedom as a means to serve the flesh?
We are meeting the King of kings and Lord of lords. And we are meeting our Father and Brother and Friend. What attire is appropriate?
The Old Testament Tabernacle and Temple must have been exquisitely beautiful to behold, bespeaking the excellence of God. Should our attire not try to reflect this in our worship of Him?
Report comment to moderator
Kayvee:
It has occurred to me that when churches focus exclusively on one generation, they then look at churches that have only old people in them (not by choice, but because the younger folk have left to go elsewhere) as “dying” churches and not as churches relevant to their own generation. I’ve spent one, and only one, service in a generational church. Though I was of the age group being served, I simply couldn’t wait till the service was over and I could go home. (I’d gone with other people or I might not have lasted thtough an entire service.) When the “elders” are all thirty and there is no one in the congregation over forty, then it feels like a youth group that didn’t like big church, not a church (to me).
I was only in a youth group for two years of my life, because my parents didn’t like youth groups. But when I was twenty, I moved too far from the church I’d been attending and went to one that happened to have a college youth group. I went to that church until I left for college at 22. And in that youth group, I learned how to refine my skills for making sarcastic comments about someone (since that was what the group did best), play volleyball, and watch other people date (not being in the dating crowd myself, if the group planned an informal event Saturday night, I regularly found out on Sunday morning by overhearing everybody else, even newer members, talk about it, because I simply was never invited to such events). I suppose we learned stuff from the Bible now and then, but I pretty much attended the church itself for worship and Bible, and the youth group in a vain attempt to make friends.
Years later, I was in contact with the youth pastor, who was by that time in his mid-forties or so. He was telling how he had recently preached a sermon at his church in full leather (pants and jacket) to shake people up, and regretted that no one seemed to notice. I wondered if he realized that shocking people wasn’t exactly the purpose of church, and I realized how much I’d been under the spiritual leadership of a man who wasn’t grown up then, and wasn’t on the verge of growing up.
Yes, this is anecdotal and doesn’t prove all youth pastors are immature. But it does show why spiritual maturity should be the mark of a pastor, and why a church made up just of young people is hurting both old (by rejecting them) and young (by not allowing them to be in connection with older people, and even in ministry to old people, when they attend church).
If I attended a church where the pastor looked sloppy (torn jeans, etc.), I’d see it as a mark of irreverence and go somewhere else. One wouldn’t attend a wedding dressed like that, because it would quickly be seen as inappropriate. If that is the best clothes one has, by all means come to church anyway. But don’t wear your gardening clothes to church if you have better.
Report comment to moderator
I understand her problem, but don’t know what to do about it. There are two cultures out there, and though they love each other, they conflict. Our church has three services. 1. “Traditional, 2”Contemporary (my son calls it the “standing and clapping” service. His 2 yr old grandson loves it.) 3 “Mixed”
We old folks attend the traditional service at 8:15. We sing the old hymns, but the “worship leader” (we used to say “music minister”), always tries to teach us some of the new Praise Songs. They are praise songs, and there’s nothing wrong with the words. They praise God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. I honestly feel guilty at times for my attitude about them. “How can you have such an attitude about praising God?”
But when compared to real songs, the words and tune (Most don’t have a definable tune.) are so shallow. It was alluded to in the article, but not stated, it appears that we have a shallow generation. Everything seems so trivial.
Yet, the Contemporary service is the most attended service. (I have no way of knowing, but I suspect the bulk of the budget comes from the Traditional service.)
If that is a way to reach people for Christ, I’m for it. While going out from the traditional service, the contemporary group is waiting. Guys wear shorts and dirty jeans. I hadn’t seen women with such cleavage at parties until the sixties.
I don’t know if something is wrong with that or not. I’m not judging them, but it doesn’t seem to be the way it should.
I’m not talking about “the old days”, they never will be that way again; in fact never were the way we remember them. In the1990’s, an old guy, who helped establish the church we attended in Falls Church said, “I want it to be the way it was in the fifties”. It never will be. When God decides to work again, it will be different.
Let’s pray for it.
Report comment to moderator
Familiarity breeds contempt. I think that a good paraphrase could be, “Familiarity with the world breeds contempt for God.”
I am no fan of stuffed shirt kinds of churches, but I will say this: The formality of the church setting brings with it a measure of respect. I would much rather see a little more formality and decorum than what passes for modesty and the chasing after the stuff of the world. We have made a bad trade and the spiritual compromises are subtle.
Rarely do we hear the term “Sunday Best,” much less see it in the attire worn to church today. I think the casual approach to church has resulted in a lack of spiritual growth, Biblical illiteracy, and church discipline.
Sarcasm on:
After all, I can go to a church where the Bible is interpreted to suit my desires, so I can harbor high places and objects and ideas in my heart rather than taking every thought captive to obedience in Christ. I can stay in my comfort zone and “do” church and still not grow spiritually (It has been my personal experience, BTW, that spiritual growth makes one uncomfortable.) If I want to sin, I can find a church that will not call me on my sin and hurt my feelings, but they will affirm me in my sin; and if they do call me on it, then I can just go worship somewhere more “tolerant,” because grace gives me license to sin. (But only if you don’t count any Pauline epistles, especially the book of Romans. Besides, Paul was a mysogenist and what he had to say was only relevant back then.)
Sarcasm off now.
We could stand to “tighten up our shot group” within the body, IMO. And a little more formality and a little less following after the world would help.
Report comment to moderator
I’d like to thank Mickey McLean for linking to my web site, and I’d like to reassure those of you concerned over my personal level of bitterness and maturity that this is about something much more complex than that. To write that and suggest that those people who feel exactly the same as I (and there are many, you just don’t hear from us much) are merely bitter is doing a huge disservice to a segment of the body of Christ that has so much to offer.
The truth of the matter is this: it isn’t as simple as writing off people who thinks as I do as being bitter, leaving in a huff, or being immature. Rather, it is a real issue of people in this (and upcoming) generation that find a certain level of workable, pragmatic, shallowness currently the accepted norm as incredibly unacceptable — that is the issue that will not go away. By shrugging us off as bitter, etc., you only add to that impression we get, though generally we just walk away silently and tend to not leave a comment saying “not so.”
I’d rather not have what I wrote devolve into a theoretical discussion on my own personal level of bitterness, personal slights, or whether or not I’m on the “dark side” of aging and getting long in the tooth.
I think, at age 34 and having been around a few times (as is suggested by time having passed me by, per an earlier commenter), I have matured and come to fairly competent level of understanding of exactly what I expressed.
I do wish to note that I do not feel as if “time has passed me by” (a statement which made me rather laugh) — on the contrary, I feel very much like there is something better coming, and that time has, instead, passed this old mode of doing church by. That is why I wrote what I did.
Report comment to moderator
most organized religion is entertainment, some more free form than others
Report comment to moderator
The trendiest thing I’ve seen in Christians lately, is to be offended that some churches don’t worship the way I like or the way I remember.
She said she was “enraged” by the way he dressed. Enraged? She wanted to dump his coffee on his head because it was in a “Starbucks like cup.” Sheesh, I didn’t think he liked coffee, I though he was into legal, addictive substances.
“Why, then critise your brother’s actions, whey try to make him look small? We shall all be judged one day, not by each other’s standards, but by the standard of Christ. . . . It is to God alone that we have to answer for out actions.” St. Paul to the Romans
And hopefully our flip flops.
Report comment to moderator
Julie – 34
I can see your irritation with the churches you are referring to, and rightly so – I too am not amused –
Too often the church today is pandering to those from nursery to High School until thirty, and from there the young married with children – and around we go again. The Word of GOD doesn’t leave out a single age group, OR whether or not someone is married -
I made a post earlier regarding the “Emergent Church” #13. Was the church you were involved with part of this group? Many in this group including Rick Warren are noted for their casual approach in dress and their messages to be other than orthodox Evangelical doctrine. However they still refer to themselves as Evangelical.
Report comment to moderator
chapman55k,
like “OpTeen” (my nickname for her), I know a little bit about the Rebelution, having read a little bit of an article talking about it, and also having read Do Hard Things. Their plan seems to be a very good idea to me, and I’m not sure how you see “They want it to be about THEMSELVES” in what they want to accomplish. If a good plan fails, is it necessarily the fault of the person/s who thought of it? There have been many good ideas that have not worked for one reason or another. The way I see it, Alex and Brett Harris are writing specifically to teens, not so the Rebelution can be all about “look at me and what I can do,” but because the authors are teens themselves. It makes more sense for them to write to those who are closest to their age, because for instance, if an adult writes to teens and says “do this or do that,” the teen may say “You don’t understand; you’re not a teen,” but the twins can say “We are teens and we did these things…so you can do great things too.”
I’ll see what OT has to say before saying any more.
Report comment to moderator
25-
most organized religion is entertainment, the scripts vary and the cast varies, but the benefit is that of entertainment
Report comment to moderator
Just to clarify: I didn’t say I was looking for a church that catered only to us old folks, I said I’m looking for a church that doesn’t exclude us old folks.
Report comment to moderator
Kayvee,
Every church should be looking after every age group. When I hear about such painful things within any group it grieves me.
It doesn’t matter what age you are, and I just bet you aren’t all that old. Do they have any groups, gatherings where every age is accepted and all are welcome? – or is everyone in age group assignments?
Report comment to moderator
REG – 29
My church doesn’t do entertainment in Worship service, either Sunday mornings, Sunday evenings, or mid week service – there is music, some praise and some hymns, and then preaching/teaching from the Bible, chapter at a time. They do have a music filled evening about once a week.
Report comment to moderator
What the poor lass doesn’t seem to realize is that she is buying into a hip new trend herself, as evidenced by her claim to want to find a group of people who will “just be church.” That’s definitely code, and it’s at least as annoying as the pastors who pander to a slightly lower stratum of hipness.
Report comment to moderator
I haven’t read her entire article yet.
Having said that, I had to impart my two cents worth about the part on the cover of the post– it is EXACTLY RIGHT ON!!!!!
I too can’t stand that phony hipness, and when that issue came, it yanked my chain immediately.
Pity me, and pray for me, because I go to a Vineyard!!!
Report comment to moderator
To chapman55k
DO HARD THINGS has changed my daughter’s life. She was a growing believer, star student, great dancer, and good friend. But she, by her own admission, was too self-centered. Reading the book has radically changed her focus to outward ministry. It has changed the way she’s looking to college and beyond. I’m grateful.
Related to the main subject of this string: I attend Christ Community Church in Franklin, TN which is part of the Presbyterian Church in America.
Genuine people who wear sandals. The church was founded by Scotty Smith. For a while, George Grant was one of the teaching pastors. Scotty would wear jeans and Birkinstocks. George would wear a suit and tie. Yet, these two men continue to show great honor for the word of God, great love for each other, seek reconciliation in the community, and “are the real deal.”
For too long, we have looked on the outside. I don’t know many of the guys in the article. But I do know a number of NextGen church leaders in several cities. They wear Tommy Bahama shirts, use iPhones, and quote from movies. However, these men are so committed to the infallibility of the word of God, the ministry of the sacraments, the fellowship of believers, and the core parts of our faith.
I fear that we discount them in the same way that others discounted Augustine, Luther, John Newton, and Issac Watts during their days. They were radical and considered “worldly.” If there were alive today doing similar things within the church, we would probably berate them and call them apostate or liberal.
Let’s try to look beyond our own bias and impression to the hearts of the men and women leading our churches (from the nursery to the pulpit).
Every time I’m sucked into a conversation like this, I am reminded that I am called as an individual to worship, serve, and commune with our Savior. Am I spending more time complaining about the attire of my pastor, the decibel level of the service, the tacit endorsement of a movie I don’t like, etc. THAN I AM studying, memorizing, meditating on God’s Word?
Ouch. I hate conviction like this.
Report comment to moderator
Rostin, I have to chuckle a bit at your statement on my apparent hipness:
“buying into a hip new trend herself, as evidenced by her claim to want to find a group of people who will “just be church.”"
You’ll note that at the end of my post I wrote favorably of my small A/G church ( of perhaps 40 people or so) which is as far from anything hip as you’ll get. We have farmers and truck drivers and nurses and teachers — typical people, meeting together as a close body of believers.
The difference isn’t the flip flops or the coffee or the things that have taken on a kind of outward symbolism (and annoyance to me) of “hipness inside! come in and be cool AND be saved!” at churches now, but rather, a small group of people of all ages and a variety of races that KNOW each other. No one is faceless or in danger of being managed in a program. I would hazard a guess that many “hip” people — whether of the emergent variety or the PDF variety or the whatever variety — would roll their eyes at my little home church but to me, it’s about real people really there for real.
This isn’t a discussion about flavors, so to speak, but about people being lost in the shuffle of programs and movements and impersonal things we have instigated in church today, things that hinder the Gospel towards a very specific kind of person who detests what I wrote about. Whether you agree with my feelings or not does not negate the fact that it is a real issue, that people really feel this way, and that, because of the Great Commission, we need to acknowledge this with a level of seriousness that goes beyond personal insults or casual dismissals of the person bearing the news.
Don’t look for code words in my writing — I’m intending for it to be very plain.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t think Neidlinger’s rant has much to do with theology. I think it is a comment on culture, and I think it has validity. I think she is right, whether we are talking about church or the office or at a dinner party. To me she feels the same turn-off that we feel when we see a Mick Jagger prancing around in a tight jump suit when he is now a senior citizen. Or when the mother of teenage girls says, “Totally awesome!” It just doesn’t seem sincere, authentic, or appropriate.
The coolest thing a person can do is be himself or herself. To me that means:
1. Dressing, talking, and acting your age.
2. Styling yourself in a way that makes you comfortable, not in a way that everyone else does.
3. Avoiding trying too hard to appeal to other people, as a smarmy insurance agent does.
In addition, I think our entire culture needs to revive the concept of appropriate dress. We should wear flip-flops and a swimsuit at the pool, sneakers and athletic clothes at the basketball court, and leather shoes and dressier clothes at a nice restaurant. In other words, we should think of both the practicality and the formality of the situation.
Report comment to moderator
Kayvee: Parsing your original point, I see three objections to these churches. 1. They act more like social workers. 2. The ministers look and dress too young (can’t figure out how to fix that grammar). 3. The sermons are not scriptural enough.
1 and 3 are essentially theological issues. 2 is a matter of what the minister looks like.
What I don’t understand is how any of those things excludes you.
But anyway, surely in a city the size of San Diego there must be a minister who looks or dresses older (grammar again), likes to talk about scripture and finds his way around what many see as Jesus’ prescriptions for social work. My guess is that it will be a smaller church, but it can’t be that hard to find.
Report comment to moderator
32-
I know that you don’t consider this entertainment, but I do!!
Report comment to moderator
I’m not going to be one of those starched-collar Christians who, based on personal preference, say that this is a sign we’re going to hell in a handbasket and that all things are wrong unless they are done as they were with the Puritans.
Of course you are.
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia, Seniors are excluded by aiming the preaching only to young families. The sermon should be meaningful to all of the members, at least most of the time.
I think I probably wasn’t clear when I said I wanted the ministers to look like adults. I didn’t mean their manner of dress as much as I meant their demeanor. A minister who is [or looks like] a young man isn’t the problem, it’s the one who talks and acts like an overgrown teenager that bothers me.
It’s a hard concept for me to explain, but here’s an example: My SIL is in his early 50s and owns a small manufacturing business. He generally wears t-shirts, shorts and flip flops at work [we are in SoCal, after all], but he’s also serious and mature in his conversations with employees and with customers who call. The young people who work for him call him and my daughter “Mr. and Mrs.” He dresses appropriately for where he is during the work-week, but on Sunday he wears a nice shirt, long pants, and shoes to church out of respect for the sanctity of the church and his love for God. That’s what I’d prefer in a minister.
Report comment to moderator
REG – 39
YOU WRITE:… “32-I know that you don’t consider this entertainment, but I do!!”
IF you consider preaching/teaching from the Word of God chapter by chapter, worshiping in song, both hymns and praise music entertainment then you haven’t been to my church.
You do get it mixed up Reg, without even explaining what you mean. Is that because you can’t explain yourself, or you feel that whatever you say will be to DEEP for any of us to understand?
Report comment to moderator
I have been a believer, by His grace, for 22 years, and have been single all 47 that I’ve lived. I read the full article, and Julie is RIGHT ON TARGET as far as I am concerned in each point.
I also echo #37 Kyle A. — when someone tries to be hip they have automatically voided themselves from attaining it.
Report comment to moderator
I serve at a church that is about 30 percent black (some Americans and some Africans) and I can tell you that dress constitutes a significant factor in how they show respect for their church and for God.
American blacks (if I may be allowed to generalize about my friends at my church) dress very sharply for church. Also, the native formal dress for our Liberian refugees is gorgeous and colorful. We have casual dressers too. The way we dress is about as diverse as anything else about us. We tend to dress rather nicely but is has little sense of formality to us.
A couple years ago, my wife demanded that I let two of our black members take me to a men’s store and help me buy three new suits. I still get compliments. What’s really cool is that my wife actually thought they would do a better job of advising me than she would.
I love church.
Report comment to moderator
“but on Sunday he wears a nice shirt, long pants, and shoes to church out of respect for the sanctity of the church and his love for God. That’s what I’d prefer in a minister.”
Amen, Kayvee.
There is little respect or reverence in the current worship style. The music is simplistic, the attitude seems to be trying to whip the congregation into a trance. We’re supposed to be worshiping GOD! How can this be?
Do you think elderly members like to stand and sing kindergarten level songs, repeated for 30 minutes? Do you respect your elders? What is going on here?
I had to quit going to Baptist churches for these reasons. I presently attend a Methodist church. The worship service is OK, but the theology is a bit light.
What is a person to do?
Report comment to moderator
It’s interesting that WMARKWHITLOCK brought up George Grant. He’s posted something about this article as well. Here’s the link.
Report comment to moderator
KayVee, Have you ever tried David Jeremiah’s church? I believe it’s in San Diego and I believe it’s called Shadow Mountain. I appreciate his radio ministry.
Report comment to moderator
Even the recent self-analysis by Willow Creek agrees with some of what Julie says in her post. The American evangelical church does feel a mile wide and an inch deep–in large part because so many of us have failed to make disciples of others for a variety of reasons.
Some of it, I suspect, is we’re just so very busy that it’s hard to take/find the time to form deep relationships–which discipleship requires. Some of us are too focused on our family that we overlook those–of all ages–who lack a center of existence that a family requires. (, I’m trying to say that raising kids in our society requires a lot of attention and activity which we can rationalize into meaning we don’t have time for anyone else, no matter how noble we may feel).
Rather than continue to throw rocks, can anyone suggest a solution?
When we are grounded in Scripture, ears pricked up to hear the Holy Spirit and sufficiently humbled by Jesus’ death on our behalf, we may be better able to serve the church body–being Jesus’ hands and feet. But that takes time, quiet, and faith. And those are hard to come by in 2008 America.
Blessings to you, Julie. Stop in at St. Mark’s Lutheran, Santa Rosa, CA, anytime. We’d love to have you.
Report comment to moderator
I know this isn’t all about clothes, as some have pointed out here, it’s about attitudes and only about clothes to the extent they reflect attitudes. But as some here do see casual clothes as reflecting a casual attitude, I wanted to give my thoughts on that aspect.
Clothes send a variety of messages, including respect – or lack of respect – for a place or people you are with. For many people they send a message about what you think of yourself. For many it’s a message about what you want other people to think about you (that you’re good-looking, or trendy, or powerful, or trustworthy, etc.)
I was brought up to view clothes as primarily a matter of comfort, and secondarily as a way to conform to social expectations (or, in the case of my mother, to refuse to conform).
People who come into church bring all that variety of attitudes about clothes. Even if you think that people should see clothes as a way of showing respect to others, including God, the reality is that probably most people in our society today see clothes primarily in a different way, about what they say about me or what I want others to think about me.
And of all the things people need to learn about God and the ways their attitudes need to change, just how important is the way they view clothing? Clothes are so visual, and people are going to see what others wear at church and right away form impressions of what those clothes signify to them (before having a chance to learn what they should think clothes signify), which may be much more along the lines of “I don’t fit in here” or “these people think appearances are very important” than “wow, these people really show respect for God.” (And that can happen whether people are all dressed in “trendy” clothing or in traditional “Sunday best.”)
That’s why I prefer my church’s approach, which is for people to wear whatever they feel comfortable wearing to church, which ranges from some very casual to more traditional. And I would hope that that leaves us more able to pay attention to what’s really important, as Michelle talks about in #48.
Report comment to moderator
It would be healthy to “wear” whatever I choose (or what God has chosen) to wear to church:
my sorrows, my joys, my burdens, God’s victories,
yes, it would be what is most important
Report comment to moderator
If one is poor and without a choice, one’s clothing indicates mainly that.
However, when we do have choices, the way we dress often reflects our inner attitude. The whole fashion industry is predicated on that fact. If I am casual, sloppy, careless, rebellious or provocative, my choice of clothes will reflect that. None of those attitudes are appropriate for my relationship with God, especially when I display them in a public worship service via my clothing.
Also, the way we dress often contributes to our inner attitude. If I want to cultivate within myself a professional attitude about my job, I will wear clothing promoting that. That is one of the many reasons why organizations often demand that their employees wear clean, neat and appropriate attire on the job.
A similar rationale applies to church. If I want to cultivate within myself, and my children, an attitude of special respect for God when I attend worship services, I will wear clean, modest clothing that is special for the day—not the same clothing that I wear for working in the yard or going to a picnic.
If I am dismayed when I see my teenager slouching in the pew, not paying attention, and with an obvious attitude problem, maybe the casual, sloppy way I let him dress that morning contributed to the problem. But then again, maybe I’m not dismayed and don’t care much either. My own attitudes and clothing choices will most likely be imitated by my children, especially if my ways are careless, lazy and lax—after all that is the path of least resistance and the way of the world.
Report comment to moderator
Llamas don’t have these problems, we all get shaved once a year unless you live in the wild and you have to wait for your winter coat to fall off.
We don’t put too much stock in the way a llama looks. Humans should remember that you can’t judge a book by its cover any more than you can judge a man by his clothes.
But humans are so good at being judges of other people that they just can’t halp themselves, have no shame and can never be satisfied
Report comment to moderator
#51 “an attitude of special respect for God when I attend worship services”
Michael Martin,
The church I attend wants to promote an attitude of respect for God 24/7, not just when attending worship services, so they don’t see any point in wearing special clothes for two hours a week. The leadership feels that using different clothing, different music styles, etc. on Sunday morning than we do the rest of the week sends a message that God cares more what we do in church than the rest of the time, and that’s an attitude they specifically want to uproot.
Report comment to moderator
Pauline,
There is a difference between the 24-7 personal worship, and the worship gathering of the faithful. (I know you know this). We can’t be with all of our brothers and sisters 24-7, but that two hours we spend together is special, if for no other reason than it is a time set aside once a week. Inasmuch as we are all members of the body and each member is in his own place of spiritual growth, some being more spiritually mature than others, should we not preserve a measure of decorum so that our liberty does not cause a less mature brother or sister stumble with an attidide of laxity?
In our personal prayer time, and spiritual life, God knows our hearts, but our fellow Christians are not always so discerning. Setting a good example is not a bad thing.
Speaking only for myself, my clothing choices reflect my attitude. More formal modes of dress do not have to sacrifice comfort, but when I’m in church, I dress in a manner fitting a more formal occasion. When I am having my own prayertime at home, I am much more casual in my atire. Sometimes I’m still in my jammies, but I certainly would not wear them to church. And if I’m leading a Bible study at church, I try to dress in a skirt and blouse, and not shorts and a tee shirt. As a leader, I think I am taken more seriously when I dress the part than when I don’t.
Report comment to moderator
I think I agree with Michael Martin. I like what J. Singletary said in #20 as well. Unlike a lot of other young people, I appreciate more formal attire and conduct in church services; that’s probably because I was raised that way. We do wear our “Sunday best” for church services. Not necessarily suits, unless the weather’s cold, but wearing long sleeved shirts and good pants (not jeans) is the general practice. However, visitors with casual attire are certainly welcome to attend!
Also, while I agree that there is a problem with shallowness and irreverence, I don’t want to judge anyone, like Pauline’s church, or those NextGen leaders that WMarkWhitlock mentioned in #35, who are more casual in their services. It probably varies from church to church.
I don’t think it’s wrong to wear different clothes to church than what you wear the rest of the week. Respect is a heart attitude, and a worship service can be a time where you show that respect outwardly with your clothes. It doesn’t have to mean that you respect God only in church. Also, for churches where dress is more casual, the result could be that the overall attitude toward God also becomes casual. It won’t NECESSARILY result in higher respect 24/7. Again, it can probably vary from place to place, and again, not judging Pauline’s church or anything.
I just hit “preview” and saw Klasko’s post. She said it better than I have.
Oh, and saying “dude” and “sweet”? I do all the time, and so do the other guys in the youth group. It’s sweet, dude!
Report comment to moderator
If you’d like to hear further discussion on this issue, I recommend this recent broadcast of “The White Horse Inn.”
Report comment to moderator
Klasco
It’s good to see you posting again
Attending church and Worshiping God means I would be wearing clothes that reflect reverence for the LORD.
I’m disappointed when I see people who attend church in shorts, t-shirts, flip-flops, or other clothes which are worn to weed the garden, or dash to the market. There’s no need to appear in church that way, lets face it most people don’t dress that way to go to the office, or attend a meeting or business appointment.
People attend weddings and dress in an appropriate way to honor the bride and groom, yet when they attend the same Church for morning Worship don’t feel compelled to honor the LORD by dressing with respect. It’s just not that difficult to wear something nice, it takes the same time to dress no matter what you wear.
Report comment to moderator
#54 “God knows our hearts, but our fellow Christians are not always so discerning. Setting a good example is not a bad thing.”
Klasko,
I definitely agree. The question is, since our fellow Christians are not able to discern our hearts, is the example they learn from the way we dress the one we hoped they would learn?
That’s what I was trying to get at in my comment #49, though I don’t know how well I explained myself. If I wear a nice dress to church, one person may see me and think “she is showing how important God is to her and how special corporate worship is.” But another may think “she is hoping people will notice how nice she looks” or “she thinks God will like her better because she dresses the right way” or “she wants to look better than someone else.”
In a congregation where most people have been churchgoers most of their lives, probably the reaction would be the first one – if they even gave the slightest thought to how I was dressed, since I would pretty much blend in with other people dressed similarly. But in a church with a lot of newcomers, whose view of clothes may be mostly about impressing people and making a statement, the effect may be quite different. And while newcomers can certainly learn how the rest of the church views church attire, you’ll probably only retain the newcomers who are more or less predisposed to that view.
As for “dressing the part” – that assumes that T-shirt and shorts are inherently inappropriate for leading a Bible study, because otherwise you’re saying that people should wear more formal clothing simply because other people expect them to. In a church where it’s common to wear casual attire, no one thinks the leader is not dressing the part because there’s not an expectation of how he will dress. I haven’t the faintest idea what our small group leaders have been wearing lately, because I don’t pay any attention to it, but I can’t imagine taking them any less seriously when they’re wearing casual clothing.
Report comment to moderator
To respond to some other comments -
I’ve nothing particularly against dressing up for church, I just don’t see it as necessary. Like Matt Y, I was raised to dress up for church, but it didn’t translate into respect for God, it was just acting the way people thought you should. And I was good at acting the way people thought I should – at least on the outside.
I’ve been to a few weddings, and while of course I dressed nicely, I never thought of it as honoring the bride and groom. I honored them by being there. As for what I wore, it was chosen to look nice enough so people wouldn’t think I had dressed too casually, and not so dressed up that anyone would think I was trying to get the attention that should go to the bride and groom.
I dress up for a job interview, because I want to make a good impression. Same thing if I have a business meeting.
In church I shouldn’t be trying to dress to impress someone. I shouldn’t be dressing to keep people from thinking I’m dressed too casually or too formally. So the reasons I have for dressing as I do elsewhere really don’t apply at church, as far as I can tell.
You might conclude that my parents should have taught me a better way to think about clothing. And you might be right – my parents did a poor job at lots of things, and their clothing habits were probably one of the more obvious facets of their eccentricity. But I doubt that I’m unique in not having grown up associating “respect toward God” with nice clothes. I understand the idea intellectually, it just doesn’t translate into experience for me.
In other aspects of worship, I do appreciate some of the more formal traditions. Standing up for Bible reading. A time for silent reflection and confession. Those are things I do miss at our current church, and appreciate on the (somewhat rare) occasions when they are incorporated into the service.
Report comment to moderator
I’m curious about one thing: much attention has been focused on the clothing aspect of what I wrote, yet not much ink has been devoted to what I see as one of the most troublesome aspects of what I attempted to say: the herding of emotions.
“There needs to be something else for those of us who can’t stand the way services are arranged, the way emotions are herded into a set time frame (which today involved — what was impossible for me — going from the whole congregation doing “the wave” as instigated by the children’s pastor into, about ten minutes later, “surrendering to Jesus” with soft piano music and hushed tones), how discussion is nil and being preached at in silence is the accepted method of learning…”
I really did not intend for it to be another mere essay on what to wear to church, but about shallowness, entertain-ism, managing people en masse, etc.
Report comment to moderator
In my church, people wear a variety of styles of clothing, but I wear black pants (slacks, if you will) and a dress shirt, because they’re the nicest clothes I have and I wish to make the extra effort to put on my best. Not because I’m trying trying to impress anyone (or because I’m in front of everyone), but because I go to worship God at church, and I wish to give Him my best. I am not judging anyone who thinks differently, as we all have our own convictions and beliefs.
Report comment to moderator
JulesVern97:
Maybe one of the reason people commented more on clothes is because it’s an issue we can relate to from our own churches; doing the wave (and the like) is not.
I do remember a week when a friend’s boyfriend had just died unexpectedly, and I showed up at church to find out that a dear elderly friend was on his deathbed, and the first song of the day was, “He’s turned my mourning into dancing again.” I don’t remember whether or not I actually pretended to sing, or whether I stayed silent during that song. I do know that the song seemed almost vulgar in its demand that I not mourn. And since I was sitting with a wife of 69 years who would soon be a widow, a more quiet spirit for her sake was also appropriate. Mourning was appropriate that morning. Sure, rejoicing in Christ was, also, and as I recall I got there by the end of the service. But that almost flippantly cheerful start to the service didn’t help anything on that particular day.
Report comment to moderator
REG 50-”It would be healthy to “wear” whatever I choose (or what God has chosen) to wear to church:
my sorrows, my joys, my burdens, God’s victories,
yes, it would be what is most important”
JULESVERN97 60-”I really did not intend for it to be another mere essay on what to wear to church, but about shallowness, entertain-ism, managing people en masse, etc.”
You can clearly see from the majority of comments on this post what is easiest to discuss, or should we say that the FLESH finds it easy to talk about what to wear rather than matters of the heart, God’s heart to our hearts, namely, the SPIRIT
Report comment to moderator
Hmm. I may be in trouble, because many folks in the mid-30s and 20s often drop “dude” and “sweet” in conversation…they’re the “bad” and “awesome” of the 2000s.
Of course, whenever I lead chapel services for my troops, I wear camouflage robes, so maybe I’m not as trendy as I ought to be.
Report comment to moderator
Mommy #47 I have visited Shadow Mountain CC for a couple of special occasions. They put on a terrific Christmas Program for a couple of weeks in December [not the Sunday Service, a variety program of music and comedy which always ends with an enactment of the Passion to remind us that Christ died for us]. However, it’s in a city in south east San Diego County [El Cajon] and I live in north west SD County [near Oceanside]. It’s something like an hour drive past a lot of other churches, so it doesn’t work for regular attendance. Besides, I think one should attend a church close to home, so that the other members will actually be neighbors with whom you can attend Bible studies and fellowship.
Report comment to moderator
#60
JulesVern97,
I’m not sure if I understand the “herding of emotions” – but if it means having emotions manipulated, then I wouldn’t like it either. Like Cheryl D, I can’t relate to being asked to do the “wave” in church, though I do remember being once in a (fairly traditional) Baptist church where we were asked to hug one another and a lot of people were uncomfortable with it.
Music is always going to play on one’s emotions, it’s an inescapable aspect of musical expression. What I look for is music that fits the words and that both fit the overarching themes of praise, confession, and aspiration to holiness.
If by “herding emotions” you mean the abruptness of switching from one emotion to another, I would object to that also, because that’s not how we naturally act, and to make us act that way takes manipulation. Again, I haven’t seen churches that do this (trying to abruptly change the mood). If anything, I would object to churches where there seems to be only one mood (in some churches, exuberant praise; in others, reverent solemnity).
The churches that were the worst offenders, in my view, regarding manipulating emotions, were the very traditional Baptist churches (where everyone dressed up for church and sang traditional hymns) – when it came time for the invitation all the words and music were directed towards playing on people’s emotions.
As for being preached at in silence, I’m not sure what the problem is with that unless people don’t feel free to say “Amen” when they agree with something, or to cough or sneeze if they have to. I doubt it’s ever completely silent in our church of several hundred including a large assortment of children of all ages. But I want to hear what the pastor says because I greatly respect his wisdom, and the only way several hundred people are going to get to hear him is if the rest of us are more or less quiet.
Outside the worship service, there are lots of other ways to learn. Informal chats with the pastors after church, small groups led by lay leaders, etc. That way we get the benefit of both large group teaching by an excellent teacher, and small group interactive learning.
Report comment to moderator
herding emotions…as in herding people in crowds as opposed to a smaller setting of a couple dozen who can effectively worship AND fellowship
Report comment to moderator
large group teaching is the same as entertainment in its effect as it misses most people in a meaningful way, and creates passivity in the spectators
Report comment to moderator
Christ Jesus when speaking to over 5,000 wasn’t considered entertainment. We aren’t told in the Word of GOD how many people should Worship or hear a message from the Bible at the same time.
Report comment to moderator
Large group teaching may have a good effect.
Unfortunately, having an extremely large church may make it difficult or impossible to fellowship with believers. If there are tens of thousands of people, how likely is it that will you get to know them and become friends? Of course, it seems to work for some people, so that’s good. Not all large-group teaching can rightfully be called entertainment, because the preaching may be good and effective. Some “churches” just put on entertainment, though, because I don’t see how watching football in church can be called worship.
Frank Perretti’s book, The Visitation, seems to have a rather apt description of some extremely large churches (if I am correct) when describing one in the story.
But once again I say “to each his own.”
If different things work for different people and aren’t unscriptural, then that’s good, and we shouldn’t have bad feeling toward one another because of that. Just agree to disagree, as I’ve heard someone say.
Report comment to moderator
“Christ Jesus when speaking to over 5,000 wasn’t considered entertainment”
nor was it done weekly
Report comment to moderator
You Reg don’t know that for fact. All the things Jesus did, all the people HE preached to are not mentioned.
If Christ had done it every day it still wouldn’t have been entertainment. We don’t know how many times our Savior spoke to thousands, people followed HIM around, they wanted to meet HIM, and they wanted to be healed.
That Reg isn’t entertainment, that the Gospel being preached to a hungry world, just as it is today. We can’t think STINGY when when GOD Almighty gives some pastors the opportunity and gifts to speak to thousands at a time, sometimes in Crusades, on Sunday morning.
Report comment to moderator
Sometimes clothes help you focus, sometimes the opposite. A lot goes into the personal interaction (say, why this item inspires that thought). I’m on the admittedly formal side. I often wear ties even when no one is looking. But that’s me; that’s what helps me focus. Same in church.
So I will grudgingly accept choices of others. The difficulty is that clothes are also signs to others. So my tie (and often coat) can look like stuffiness or even (dread word for a Dem), conservatism. Likewise, some choices of others look too sloppy — I wonder, are they serious?
I think we end up back in Romans 14 — we want to dress in ways that don’t cause our brother or sister to stumble. Some of us curmudgeonly types will have to (ahem) be more tolerant; some of casual types will need to tighten up.
And btw, I really resonated with Michael’s comments [51].
Report comment to moderator
Harris
My husband doesn’t wear a tie, but he almost always wears a coat unless its a very hot day. Living in Southern, CA – most people don’t wear ties in the summer time.
I agree with much of what you posted.
Report comment to moderator
I’m glad Harris brought up Rom 14. The guidance on Christian freedom given by Paul there is profound. Finding a non-judgmental balance between my personal preferences and a loving consideration for others is always a tough task for all of us, especially in areas we consider important. In the area of non-essentials, Christian love compels me to consider others before myself and to make allowances when they cannot or even will not.
A friend once gave me this helpful illustration. Consider a notebook paper divided into three columns, labeled from left to right: Absolutes, Convictions, Preferences. The left column (Absolutes) will contain relatively few entries: thou shalt not murder, steal, covet, etc. There is no negotiation or compromises on these things. Violations are obvious sins, displeasing to God, and demanding repentance.
The center column (Convictions) will contain more items, most of which should logically grow out of the absolutes in the left column. They are like a personal fence to keep some distance from the left column and to aid me in avoiding temptation and not violate the absolutes. They are not the same for everybody. For example, if I have an alcohol problem, my personal conviction may be to not ever drink alcohol because it starts me down a road that I cannot handle and which leads me into serious sin. Others do not have that problem and their convictions allow them to drink moderately.
The right column (Preferences) will have a lot of entries and some of these will also grow out of the column to the left. Many will not; they are just THERE because I like strawberry ice cream better than chocolate, or blue better than red, etc.
This illustration helps me to better understand some of the problems with human choices. First, I can really get into trouble when I make my convictions and preferences normative for other people. That can create a multitude of personal relations problems. It can also create problems between me and God because the tendency to dictate to other people stems from my own sins of pride and lack of Christian love.
The second problem I see is related to a thought from Francis Schaeffer. He said something to the effect that a lot of people get their pre-suppostitions like they get the measles; they just pick them up along the way of life without any thought or logical connection between them. Sometimes this tendency leads people to hold contradictory views without even realizing it—they just haven’t thought things through and their lives are a mass of confusing contradictions in both beliefs and behaviors.
Why do I believe what I do and behave like I do? In the illustration, the logical flow should go from left to right, starting with the foundation of God’s Word and impacting, down the line, everything I do and think. The fewer the inconsistencies and contradictions, the better.
In my earlier post, I made a connection between clothing and attitudes. I still think this is true, but the reminder of Rom 14 that Harris posted compels me to think more carefully about just how I live that out in relation to other people. They have convictions and preferences too that I need to respect and understand; and they are not necessarily rooted in what I think may be bad attitudes.
Sometimes, I think that finding a balance in all of this is like trying to walk a high wire across Niagara Falls. It’s really difficult.
Thanks for your post Harris.
Report comment to moderator
Thank you for your post #75, Michael.
Report comment to moderator
Rather than continue to throw rocks, can anyone suggest a solution?
“Love one another as I have loved you….”
Report comment to moderator
how about more local, smaller communities of worship and fellowship without the high dollar priorities?
Report comment to moderator
You know, this would be so much easier if there were an Eleventh Commandment forbidding us to dress casually when we gather with other believers. Or that Paul had included a little footnote somewhere in his talk about the Lord’s Supper, telling us that besides examing ourselves, we need to dress to impress God.
Anyone who thinks they dress up on Sundays to impress God and not either some combination of themselves or the people around them is deluding themself.
And I would be curious to know if there is anyone at all who thinks this custom of dressing up an actual command rather than a tradition of men. By the way, just in case I’m wrong and someone does think this is a command of God, you’re deluding yourself. It’s nothing more than a tradition of men, like the Pharisees insisting on washing their hands before eating and abusing tithing so they could get out of supporting their parents. If we insist on dressing up for worship and set ourselves up as judges of what is in the hearts of our fellow worshippers, we are exactly the same. And if we abuse dressing up for worship so we can get out of reflecting the Fruits of the Spirit, we are again exactly the same.
And if we think dressing up for church is more important than church itself (that would be LEAVING the church) then we are not worshipping God at all but have set up for ourselves our own religious idols.
Report comment to moderator
Cicero,
I don’t consider it important to dress up for church myself, but I don’t think the people here (for the most part) who do consider it important are trying to impress God or each other. (Not that I can see their hearts, but I don’t see any indication that it is that either.) I certainly don’t think anyone here thinks that dressing up for church is more important than church itself.
As several have indicated, how we dress does often have an effect on our attitudes. People who work from home are advised to get dressed rather than work in pj’s because it affects how they view their work. And there’s certainly no one there to be impressed. There is something about taking care in how one dresses that affects how we view the occasion we’re dressing for.
Where I differ from proponents of dressing up for church is that those positive effects come mixed with negative ones. It is so easy to fall into paying too much attention to how other people dress, and also people from a different or no church tradition can easily get the wrong impression regarding why we’re getting dressed up before they hear what we think is really important.
On balance, I would rather have the (unspoken) message that God accepts us as we are (some more casual and some more formal based on preference), and that He cares more about the inside than the outside, given precedence over the message that we want to dress up to show how special this time of corporate worship is.
Report comment to moderator
Well said Pauline.
Report comment to moderator
Yes, you are right Pauline.
I neglected to bring up the psychological benefits, though I would be wrong to deny them, obviously.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t get so excited about attire…If he wears a suit or a pair of cut offs…God can use him and I will listen if he preaches the word.
Cultural dress codes of today such as are being discussed would exclude most Jewish men from 30 AD. Men didn’t do suits…or even pants.
I hadn’t heard Jesus dressed up or down for going to temple, so I’m thinking not a big issue.
However, that said…to do honor to a guest or to an invitation that I am greatful for(such as being with the body of Christ)…I make a point of looking my best…if ragged pants are the best you can do to show God how greatful you are to be in His house…alive another day…blessed by your Creator…then ragged jeans and attendance is better than suit out fishing on a Sunday.
Report comment to moderator
This would not even be an issue if we weren’t in America. I wonder what the “dude” in the photo and subsequent article is thinking. If I am not a member of that particular church what right do I have to criticize or make grandiose judgments concerning the heart of the leadership based on whether or not they are shopping at Old Navy or JC Penney?
Here is a “NextGen” quote for everyone – “Stop Dating the Church”. This whole discussion from the rant on down sounds more like Jerry Seinfeld making excuses to not date “man hands” than it resembles a discussion about leadership and what is done during the most segregated hour in America. Generational churches are SWEET, but the truth is that until everyone is unselfish and looks to the interests of others than this is going to be a problem. Trendiness is a symptom, just like the anger toward trendiness is a symptom. What you wear in the Dakotas is different than what someone wears in Florida or where ever.
The beauty is that you can find a church – it may cost you time and gas but you can find a church to love and be loved by. Are we willing to die to ourselves and love the church? Even in sandals and baggy jeans? Even in dress shirts and ties? How are we to discern everyones heart at our closet and make sure we pick just the right outfit that will not offend someone?
As far as the bending of the emotions during the worship service. As a leader in a church, I think that putting together a worship service that is not “entertaining” and yet is meaningful can be hard to do. Let’s face it we like people to want to come to our church and we want them to connect to God and for some of us that means a lot of different things. The means is always under scrutiny but the discussion about lives being changed and challenged in the “NextGen” church is rarely discussed.
I recommend Joshua Harris’ “Don’t Date the Church” – it might change your thinking. (Heavy sarcasm follows) But be careful, the Harris’ just want you to be like them! And make it about them!
Report comment to moderator
Sorry, it’s “Stop Dating the Church”
OOPS! Everything I just said has now been muted.
Report comment to moderator
I’m the guy in the picture on the cover of World Magazine that Julie referenced in her original post. I’m sorry I’m late to the conversation; I just found out today that my clothes and faux-coffee had created a mini-uproar in blogdom.
I know that her post was not personal, although I will admit that my feelings were a little hurt at first by the comments about my clothes. But I am the father of a 21 year old son and a 17 year old daughter who often remind me that I’m not cool, so I am used to it.
My point is not about how I dress or whether I represent all that is wrong with “NextGen Worship”. Julie and I share many of the same concerns about relevance as the goal of ministry and the desire to fit into culture rather than to shape culture. I am concerned that we may be forgetting the point of church is to point people to Jesus.
My point is that Julie’s problem with me, and by extension the type of church my picture represents, might be based on perception rather than on reality. I don’t know how many pastors Julie knows personally and I don’t know how many churches she has worked in. I have had the opportunity to connect with hundreds of pastors across the country. I have found some who were caught up with image, relevance and coolness and they too made me want to dump coffee on their heads. The vast majority, however, simply wanted to follow the Apostle Paul in becoming all things to all me so that by all means they might win some. They are doing their best as imperfect humans to share the Good News in the best way they know how. Along the way they make mistakes and they take abuse and people walk out in the middle of their sermons, but they keep trying to honor God and minister to people. They are real people who more often than not end up looking lame because they can’t find clean socks and have to wear flip flops to church.
My encouragement to Julie is to find a church family that she can commit to for life if possible. Get up close to the pastor, hear his heart, help him relate to the needs of young, single women. Roll up her sleeves and throw herself into ministry. Be prepared to be disappointed and misunderstood and let down because that is what ministering to people looks like from the inside. But also be prepared for the ride of her life as God uses her to reach out to the Julies and Davids who are looking for the same thing she is looking for.
If Julie ever ends up in South Carolina maybe we could meet at Starbucks and I could buy her a cup of chai (I actually don’t drink coffee) Hopefully if she gets to know me she won’t want to dump it on my head. Or she might, but at least she’d have a good reason.
Report comment to moderator
I find it interesting how we’ve come full circle. I can remember less than 10 years ago people were turned off by pastors who wore ties and stuffy suits… “they weren’t real, they only wore that stuff on Sundays!”
Could it be that pastors and teachers are being themselves on Sundays just as they are during the week? Are people sick of authenticity?
I think the generalizations of some of the comments above are unnecessary. You really can’t talk about a church or “big” churches in general unless you are plugged into that church and know the heartbeat of that church…right? Or are some of the comments based on hearsay?
Great thoughts and conversation!
Report comment to moderator
Good comments Geoff, et. al.
Since the comments will be closed in just two days, I wanted to note a couple of things that I think have been lost:
1. It was never really just about the “clothes” and externals, though that is what was the last straw, in a sense, and is what portion of what I wrote is being excerpted.
2. I repeatedly state in the post and in other comments on other blogs that I did not doubt the sincerity of the church I left, or that the people there were not “Christians” or that they were not the “true church” or any such nonsense.
3. This has nothing to do with what is fashionable in North Dakota — how that has reared its ugly head in various blogs is rather strange.
I really hope that those who have left comments or joined in the conversation have read the full post I wrote — including the comments and subsequent discussion, of which many links are provided to back at the original post — before jumping to any of the above three conclusions, or those that I have not mentioned.
I’ve had lots of helpful (and a few not so helpful, which I will treasure) emails from this post, and most people, whether they agree with me or not, are sincere in wanting to follow Christ. It just may be as simple as this: some ways we do church are going to attract many, and repel others.
What I described is repellent to me, and those like me. You’ll note I never said it applied to all people, because it may not be so to other people. As Geoff said, the goal is to point people to Christ. Some of the ways we do this actually hide Christ from some people. I wrote that post just so you would be aware of that, not so that I could inspire arguments on the proper suit to wear, where the skirt hem should hit, or that Jesus wore sandals, or that some guy says “sweet” Monday through Saturday but not on Sunday so that’s OK, or that I’m bitter and old.
I worry that a larger message got lost in the lesser building blocks it was made of.
Report comment to moderator
when will the search for the “better” pastor end?
Report comment to moderator
When the sheep are perfect, Reg.
Report comment to moderator
You know there are a couple of things that I have not seen addressed in the responses.
1. It isn’t about the dress, it is about the message. The Gospel is Gods power to salvation, not the way we dress, the type of music we sing, worship style or setting. Most of us are missing the point entirely.
2. “Being all things to all people” does not mean that I must adopt their “culture”, dress, music etc. Otherwise we would need to be a drug user in order to reach the drug users, pornographers to reach those in pornography – wait don’t scream, I am taking the idea to it’s logical absurdity but hopefully you get my point. If we were to take what the “church growth” folks and post-moderns were telling us then the modern missionary movement would never have been successful, William Carey did not become an Indian in order to reach India.
3. Finally, most of what we see is in my opinion truly caving in to our increasingly post-modern culture, not an attempt to reach into it. It is moving away from anything “traditional” or “modern” to that which is different since all things “traditional” are bad. It is adopting a “minimalist” mind set about just about everything – and yes we are beginning to see it in their theology as well as many “post-moderns” and “emergent” folks are beginning to give up on scriptural authority, the whole trend about not knowing anything for sure…….
Well just some random thoughts from a guy who is not post-modern, who thinks that maybe, just maybe, when we come to God in worship, the fact that we are collectively standing before the Throne of Grace, that we puny, sinful (justus et pecator) creatures are standing before an infinitely holy God ought to have enough of a concept of the seriousness and gravity of that situation to see it reflected in our dress, our music, the setting, et. al.
Respectfully submitted.
Report comment to moderator
What about the Good Shepherd and the priesthood of believers?
Report comment to moderator
Jesus said, “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” – Matthew 18:20
As others have said, we don’t go to church, we are the church.
Some of the best “church” time for me has been in the homes of fellow believers, talking of the things of the Lord, sharing Scriptures, praying, singing encouragements to one another (even “ditties” like 1st John 4:7 and
and singing praise and commitment to the Lord.
We are to make disciples, are we not? How long does it take to train up a disciple to the point where he can train up a disciple?
I have an idealistic vision of something like Star War’s Master Qui-gon Jinn with Obi-wan Kenobi as his Padawan learner. But in reality I see nothing approaching that level of commitment, though I have heard the phrase (Navigators?) something like, “Each one, take one” to disciple.
Report comment to moderator
Oh, that was weird.
The 8 and closing parentheses in my parenthetical “even “ditties” like 1st John 4:7 and 8″ got turned into an emoticon.
Report comment to moderator
And what church did Dr. Livingstone attend, deep in the heart of unknown African territory for all those years?
Report comment to moderator
Reckon you guys could have posted a pix of this angry gal? When was she last asked out on a date? I suspect she does lotsa blogging on Fri and Saturday nights.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!