Since I quoted Mars Hill Church in my last blog, I googled it to see what came up. I came across a site that had people who reviewed the church. All but one of the reviews were 1 out of 5 stars with very negative comments, mainly towards the style (or content) of teaching and because it seemed like the church was mostly concerned about growing that specific church (which I get caught up a little in our own church). But one thing really caught my attention. They all had attended the first time because it seemed more like a "club" or "show" to them.
The negative comments were mainly because the sermon seemed conservative or legalistic. A few complained that it seemed anti-feminist. But, for this post, I'm concerned with what brought them in.
In essence, it was a celebration of "pop-culture." There is a free coffee bar, booming music, tattooed congregation, a "blogging pastor", and the like. Apparently, all of these people who are reviewing had some sort of attraction to this place. It was the loud music, the buzz factor that brought them to that place. I've always wanted our church to have that buzz factor, but it has never transpired. Revolution Church (Bobby's old church) had it, I'm sure his new church will probably have it in due time, but will Rancho Vista Church have the "it" that makes people want to attend? I don't know...but I don't know if that is the way to go.
What is it that makes people want to come to your church? At Rancho Vista, we choose the personal relationship route. It is a much more difficult way to get people to come to your church. Personally, I think louder music is a great start for any style of church (for a blog later tonight) to get people interested in a service. But, with the relationship form of evangelism, it tends to keep people around longer once they show up.
So, do we need the buzz factor, or do we (I) just need to be more diligent about inviting friends to our church? And I don't want to get caught up in inviting friends who are already Christians to come to our church, because getting the numbers up at our church isn't going to help the kingdom of God. I don't know but I'm pretty sure I'll always wish we had a hip church that people couldn't help but to go to.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
"Contemporary" Church
Posted by Fickle Obsessor at 12:27 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
very interesting. good thoughts. thanks for blogging again. see - you do have stuff to say!
I'd be interested to know what website you were looking at reviews at. Driscoll has taken a lot of heat from critics, but I think he rocks, not just because of the churches methods but even more so because of his preaching and theology. Just my two cents to throw in there.
And a quick thought on attraction vs. relationship. The two don't have to be mutually exclusive in my opinion, and if you have the attraction factor but but no real community happening, then who gives a rip! There's two more cents. You're up to four.
I agree with you on the "attraction vs. relationship" angle. My whole point is that the initial attraction of the church and the relationships that are formed (either outside of the church or inside the congregation), in conjunction with each other, is the ideal combination. At least in my opinion. I think with Revolution, you had a great mix of "buzz factor" and then continued to build on top of that with the relationships that were formed, through life groups, 4 x 4, and the like. I also think with your personality and leadership style, that will be one of your focal points at CLC. But, if you are to bring ideas along from Revolution to CLC, you will probably create a little word around town about this new church with a hip vibe to it.
Post a Comment