Posted on 11/22/2005 7:11:21 AM PST by nckerr
'Megachurches' draw big U.S. crowds
By Joyce Kelly and Michael Conlon
CHICAGO (Reuters) - On a recent Sunday at Willow Creek Community Church, a Christian rock band joined by dancing children powered up in the cavernous main hall, their images ablaze on several gigantic screens.
Thousands of worshipers from the main floor to the balcony and mezzanine levels were on their feet rocking to a powerful sound system. Outside cars filled a parking lot fit for a shopping mall. Inside some people drifted into small Bible study groups or a bookstore and Internet cafe for lattes, cappuccinos and seats by a fireplace.
This church near Chicago and others like it number their congregations in the thousands on any given Sunday in stadium-size sanctuaries; but in the end a major appeal of America's megachurches may be the chance to get small.
Institutions like California's Saddleback Church, Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Illinois and Houston's Lakewood Church, each drawing 20,000 or more on a weekend, offer not just a vast, shared attraction but a path that tries to link individuals on a faith-sustaining one-to-one level beyond the crowd, observers and worshipers said.
Rick Warren, founder of California's Saddleback Church and author of the best-selling book "The Purpose-Driven Life," told a seminar held earlier this year by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life that about 20 churches in America have more than 10,000 in weekend attendance.
"These churches can do a ton of things that smaller churches can't," said Nancy Ammerman, professor of the sociology of religion at the Boston University School of Theology.
"They have the resources to produce a professional-quality production every weekend, with music (often specially composed for the occasion and backed by a professional ensemble) and video and lighting and computer graphics and a preacher who knows how to work a crowd," she said.
But they also support "dozens or even hundreds of specialized opportunities for people to get involved in doing things with a small group of others. If you want someone to talk to who really understands what it is like to parent an autistic child, you may find a whole support group in a megachurch," she added.
MORE CHOICE
"Or if you really love stock car racing, but hate being surrounded by drunken rowdies, you can go with a busload of your church friends. I wouldn't say that there are fewer rules in most of these churches. Most of them really expect people to get involved in ways that can have a profound impact on their lives. It's just that there are so many paths into involvement that a smaller church just can't match," Ammerman said.
That's part of what Richard and Nancy Sauser of Schaumburg, Ill., said they found at Willow Creek where they have been members for more than 10 years. They attend regularly with their daughters, ages 5 and 7. The 30-year-old church draws 20,000 weekend worshipers.
"Anything they put their minds to, they can pretty much do," he said, marveling at the power inherent in size. But he added, "Willow Creek has the resources to effectively execute on multiple facets of church life," through more than 100 different ministries.
Sauser said he does not attend Willow Creek for its size but for the teaching and the ministry.
When the thousands at Willow Creek break into smaller groups for Bible study, the men's ministry, the special needs ministry and the adult ministry, a lot of life change occurs. "In the small groups, that is where it really gets good," Sauser said.
When the crowds head for Willow Creek's parking lot, attendants in orange vests direct processions of cars into smoothly paved parking lots ahead of the 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. services. Inside, the throng moves through the hallways and up and down escalators and stairs, welcomed by smiling greeters.
Some drop off children at Sunday school.
On the first floor Danielle Jackola of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, a mother of two who recently moved to the area from California, has come in search of a church. After listening to dynamic lead pastor Gene Appel speak on family and passing the baton of faith from one generation to the next, she liked the message -- and the entertainment.
"I had never been to something like that. I think that is one of the ways of getting your numbers up ... to get the message across but to keep it fun and upbeat. And more contemporary to get more young families involved," she said a few days later -- after deciding to join the church.
SEARCH FOR MEANING
Scott Thuma, a sociologist of religion at Hartford Seminary in Connecticut, said his research indicates there are at least 1,200 U.S. Protestant churches which claim more than 2,000 weekly attendees.
Megachurches are addressing the needs of Americans who are disinterested in "traditional church" yet want to deepen a sense of meaning in their lives. Classes and volunteer ministry opportunities lead to a deeper commitment, he said.
"They have opened worship to the seeker and the unsaved rather than reserving Sunday worship for the saved and sanctified," Thuma added.
The three largest churches are Saddleback, Willow Creek and Houston's Lakewood. But Warren said the world has far larger churches, pointing to mammoth Christian congregations in Nigeria, South Korea and elsewhere.
Warren said U.S. Protestants have returned to the 19th century roots of the evangelical movement, emphasizing social issues such as caring for the sick, the poor and the powerless, and not just concentrating on personal salvation.
"The small group structure is the structure of renewal in every facet of Christianity, including Catholicism," Warren told the Pew forum. He said his church has 9,200 lay ministers leading more than 200 different ministries all over southern California with 2,600 small groups in 83 cities.
The Rick Warren approach is shallow. Many will be attracted by the glitz and comfort of the message.
Yet, who will lead them into deeper truths of discipleship?
I went to a mega-church as a new christian years ago. But there was no message there to deepen my faith and I left shortly after.
It's the same thing all over again.
Actually, you HAVE struck a nerve with this one. I DO lose my sense of worship when we do a song that has for lines repeated over, and over, and OVER!
...And from a musical point of view, it's not good songcraft.
The only exception is "Agnus Dei". That song brings me to tears every time.
So, by using that logic, would it be ok to have an Ebonics version of the Bible?
Language changes. Styles change.
You don't think something gets lost in the translation?
>>But the place we're trying to take the congregation to is a lot more accessible<<
1) Where are you trying to take them?
and
2) Are you suggesting that the Holy Spirit's working in an unsaved heart is hindered by language?
"It is about bringing glory and honor to the Lamb"
now here's one for you then.. shouldn't we all serve according to our talents? we know that singing, dancing and playing instruments are all in the bible, but what of the others? the light techs, the sound techs, the cameramen and video editors, the graphics artists and media producers? they all should be allowed to use their talents to glorify the lord.
the problem comes when the church forgets about worship and is only out there to preform and entertain.
To the altar (figuratively speaking)
2) Are you suggesting that the Holy Spirit's working in an unsaved heart is hindered by language?
No, sorry, sometimes I'm not clear. The Holy Spirit will do what it will - He does not need me. What I meant is that many times people can be moved by the Spirit without knowing where it is moving them (there are many levels of christian maturity). Spelling it out in modern language just helps the process along. I don't consider it "dumbing down" any more than Wesley was "dumbing down" the music of his day.
Unless you are going to argue that the only songs in church should be in Aramaic and Latin , any song you point out as "appropriate" would have been a more modern rendering of the music of the previous generation.
In 1986, while one visitation, we went by a church gathering and heard "Yeah, Jesus, that's what I like!"...they were singing Chantilly Lace by the Big Bopper.
Personally, I enjoy altering the words of songs but you would never catch me Singing the "Ballad of Jesus Clampett" as a church special.
"Come and listen to my story 'bout man who is God."
LMAO!
"now here's one for you then.. shouldn't we all serve according to our talents? we know that singing, dancing and playing instruments are all in the bible, but what of the others? the light techs, the sound techs, the cameramen and video editors, the graphics artists and media producers? they all should be allowed to use their talents to glorify the lord.
the problem comes when the church forgets about worship and is only out there to preform and entertain."
Within the Body of Christ, I think that we are all called to use our spiritual gifts to edify the body and bring glory to Him. As I understand the relevant Biblical passages, a spiritual gift is given by the Holy Spirit at the time that the Spirit enters a person's life. It is something different than a talent and the requirements for its use are thus different.
God obviously gives everyone talents, the just and unjust alike. But that is different from spiritual gifts. Someone who is unregenerate might be enormously talented at light shows, but it would be very improper to use his talents within the church precisely because he can't use his talents to God's glory, but only to his own.
Now that I think about it, I'm not sure that singing a solo is on any list of spiritual gifts. It is much more like a talent...a good one and one that requires real work. But I think the church would function just fine without it, because there are plenty of ways to give glory to Christ without invoking that talent. The proper Biblical use of spiritual gifts is one way to do that.
The way I see it, our duty is to be faithful to the Word of God, and a lot of the contemporary "worship" songs are nothing more than frothy feel-goodness, with NO Biblical and/or theological content. It becomes junk-food for the soul.
His word will go forth and not return void - it will accomplish what He purposes, but we need to be mindful that what we're putting forth is Truth, and not just what man wants to hear.
I've seen it happen first-hand where man, in his sin-soaked heart which is so easily drawn into emotion, gets "whipped up" into an emotional frenzy based on music and/or a dazzling light show or emotional power-point slideshow.
That entertainment becomes the center of his faith, and not Christ's atonement of our wretched state. It can easily become the only way he can "worship" - if he has that particular music. No prayer, no supplication, no humilty, no Godly sorrow for his sinful state - all because of some easy-to-sing songs.
I've seen this happen so often, especially in teens. The music and entertaining environment becomes their faith, because it appeals to their desire-driven nature. "What you win them with is what you win them to" - sort of thing. This can produce a lot of false conversion, and as such a lot of false assurance. It becomes a superficial faith. And when they eventually find out that nothing in their hearts have changed, they become embittered to anything resembling Church.
In the end, the seeker-sensitive flashy show can produce the exact opposite of what it intended.
LOL!
If you are a musician, try this some time:
Play "Stairway to Heaven" on guitar, singing the lyrics to the "Gilligan's Island" theme at the same time. It's uncanny how they fit together!
I have no problem that we have to look hard at the family. But when I have posted that that would include making use of the rather harsh Biblical teachings on divorce, I get a lot of flack from the "judge not" line of reasoning. At any rate, I'll assume we are in basic agreement on that.
Now, as to this:
"Besides, no one in their right mind could seriously suggest that a 21st-century American church needs to be set up exactly as a 1st-century church in the Middle East. Utter silliness."
I'm glad you clarified that, because it shows we are arguing from different premises. I believe in both the inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture. And that is the historic teaching of most of the church. You obviously don't accept that Scripture sets forth the guidelines for a modern church, and I appreciate your candor. We'll just have to agree to disagree there because there is no way I can convince you otherwise. I can only say that I used to think that way, also....but then one day it occurred to me: if I am not going to go by a Biblical standard, then what IS the standard? I would like to hear what sources of authority are normative for those who don't accept the sufficiency of Scripture.
One thing from church history that is pretty clear to me is that when we adhere to Biblical norms, the Church flourishes (part of flourishing meaning being persecuted, obviously). Societies are transformed. Lives are saved and so on. When we do not, we suffer.
As time goes on, I tend to think that the Bible is more true, not less. But that's just me.
Reminds me of the church I grew up in. Our pastor would not allow "The Lord's Prayer" to be sung as a SOLO.
I agree that this is not worship and, as you say, counterproductive.
But what would you say of a service that has all of these things (prayer, supplication, humility, repentance) AND simple-to-sing songs? There is no cause and effect between the two, in my opinion.
We pray, we confess, we praise, we read the Word, we hear a sermon on the word, we have a Baptist-style invitation (shhh, don't tell the other Methodists...) .
Anyway, I agree that seeker churches are empty calories, but I also believe that once someone is truly saved, they'll be moved by the spirit to leave for a deeper kind of worship.
"now here's one for you then.. shouldn't we all serve according to our talents?"
Not to really rag on you, but to show the limited power of that point:
If that is the case, what about Bubbles, the pole dancer, who's only talent is to selectively expose herself to striptease music? Should she be allowed to dance to the glory of God? I bet she would attract a lot of men to the church. Plus, the offering would be something they look forward to instead of suffer through.
just fyi, the form of music doesn't get me too fired up...so long as the lyrics aren't "me" centered and doctrinally erroneous. Scripture says we can lift holy hands and all that, so I don't get very bent out of shape about how the music sounds. Me, I would love all the music to be Bach. But that's probably a minority opinion.....electric keyboards, drums, etc. I don't really mind. It's all about the content.
Seriously, no doubt Bubbles could be trained in Liturgical Dance.
But lap dances would be out of the question ;)
Yeah, it is always better to shun the divorced. It is especially good to shun the children of divorced and single parents.
Clearly a church is no place for sinners or those seeking to remedy their failings.
One can always get a magical annulment and VOILA!.....it never happened!
Reminds me of the church I grew up in. Our pastor would not allow "The Lord's Prayer" to be sung as a SOLO."
I had not thought about that until now. What was his rationale? Now that I think about it, I tend to think that he's right.
I would say that if all those things were being done, and being done from Godly motives, then the congregation would see no need for pop-christianity tunes, and would grit their teeth at the sugary-sweetness of them.
I would say that congregation is on spiritual meat, and has no need for powdered milk.
>>Anyway, I agree that seeker churches are empty calories, but I also believe that once someone is truly saved, they'll be moved by the spirit to leave for a deeper kind of worship.<<
Why would any God-fearing church be satisfied with scriptural shallowness and surface-level worship? I simply don't understand the argument for the need of "starter-churches", and I certainly wouldn't have anything to do with one who was satisfied being a first-stage church only.
After I was saved, I left our "seeker" church for a more theologically sound church. Not because I was "ready" to move on to phase 2, but because with my new eyes I saw the blatant apostacy of the church we were in and it offended me. As the spiritual leader of my family, I was wracked with the obligation to lead my family to a solid church rooted in sound doctrine.
This isn't fun n' games, this is eternity we're talking here. There was no time to waste.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.