This article has been getting some attention as of late.
While listening to 'Christian' radio the other day I heard an interview
premised by it and they had a local pastor on the show to discuss the demise of
the Church. It was yet again a case of blind leading the blind. The pastor had
nothing to offer. He wasn't even able to offer the normal combative narrative
that it's the liberal churches that are closing. In the end he said, it comes
down to poor leadership.
It was clear his was the marketing/entertainment approach of
most Evangelical churches and yet he might do well to look at something like
Willow Creek. The fad is fading and the 'church' continues to drift toward
theological liberalism. When you build a church (Barna style) based on the
world, it becomes indistinguishable from the world and thus after awhile the
world doesn't see the point. People have better things to do on Sunday morning.
As far as the buildings there's a kind of sentimentality that
creeps in. Many are attached to the structures and the effect they have on the
skyline. And yet in reality the buildings are themselves a result of erroneous
theology and became an albatross once congregations began to shrink. From basic
upkeep to paying the heating bill most of these buildings are ridiculous. But
for many it 'feels' like 'church' when you sit in a grand edifice with lines
that pull the eye toward the vaulted ceiling etc...
If the congregations no longer preached the Scripture then
their elimination is actually a cause for rejoicing. That's one less false
voice of competition out there. That's one less watered-down option for people
to choose. If they're not interested in Biblical Christianity, let them stay
home. Let their testimony disappear because in the end it just harms ours. Many
of these 'congregations' hang on simply because they have the building. It, not
the gospel, keeps people coming. I've seen this firsthand on multiple
occasions.
Some will disagree with this, believing that some kind of
church is better than no church. But then again, these are the same people that
would grant validity to a PCUSA with a woman pastor before they would a
congregation meeting in a home, led by those unaffiliated with a denomination.
Apparently in the end the mark of a church is what the world thinks.... a
building with a sign and some person with an official title and affiliation to
a bureaucracy.
But that's not in accord with the New Testament.
I've told a story before about a Bible study that we hosted
years ago. A local woman joined the group. Her affiliations had been with the
local United Methodist congregation. She had quit going at some point because
she didn't like the pastor. She didn't know even the ABC's of the Bible. She
didn't even understand how the chapters and verses worked. Thirty years at the
UMC had rendered her a Biblical illiterate. At one point in the study a
question arose regarding children being sinners and she didn't like it. She
rejected the notion even though that's what the text clearly taught.
Well, she quit coming but we heard (through one of the other
ladies at the study) that she called her daughter all upset and was referred to
the daughter's Methodist pastor who assured her that they didn't believe that.
He tickled her ears and in the end she ended up back at the local UMC.
I'm pleased to report that congregation has since collapsed
and today the building is a residence. The Word clearly wasn't being taught and
yet people were given a false peace that they were part of a church and they
could sing 'it is well with my soul'... even when it wasn't. The woman from the
study has long since died. She's responsible for her own soul but I wouldn't
want to be the clownish 'pastor' that danced around in front of the
congregation with a Dora the Explorer backpack rather than teaching people the
Scriptures. They will give an account.
The town is sad because the building is a landmark. Its spire
defines the skyline of the town and is quite picturesque with forested hills in
the background and the river in front. Will the new owner maintain the steeple
or take it down? Time will tell. The debate is about aesthetics, history and
sentimentality. Spiritually speaking the collapse of the congregation is (in
terms of history) a defeat and cause for lament, but given what it had become
over the past few generations, its elimination is a good thing.
This story of closing church buildings isn't really much of a
story or at least it's not the story people think it is. It's not a lack of
good leadership or managerial style. It's something more basic. These are
congregations that lost their way and died. They lost the Word and perished.
The buildings are just monuments to their error. While it's sad to see old
buildings torn down, in another respect it's right and just for it to happen.
And the Willow Creek and Saddleback buildings will have their day too. They're
built on sand.
On one level I can understand why people lament this
development but in the end it's for the greater good of the Church.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.