Sometimes Christians ask the wrong question.
For example, Christianity Today recently put out a press release that I happened to stumble on that compared the results of two different research projects with conflicting data. One was a survey that found that those who are unchurched prefer more traditional, cathedral-like design when it comes to a church that they would be interested in going to. The second was a study that found that churches planning to build, renovate, or remodel within the next 18 months are planning to go with more modern architecture. They noted that these churches may be deterring those whom they are trying to reach.
Christianity Today put out their press release asking why there was a disconnect and (I think) subtly suggesting that churches build instead to attract the unchurched.
It makes sense. If most churches ask how they can grow and the research shows that one way is to go with more cathedral-like architectural design, it just doesn’t make much sense to build differently. Unless, perhaps, the church isn’t interested in attracting new people but is more concerned with what their current congregation thinks. But that seems far-fetched. I don’t know of a church that isn’t interested in reaching the unchurched.
But asking why churches don’t try harder to attract the unchurched is the wrong question entirely.
For one, it elevates what might be attractive to the point that it is deserving of consideration. But I question whether it really should deserve consideration. When reading the accounts of the early church in the New Testament, it is hard to come away with the sense that they did what they did in an effort to attract outsiders. We have no indication that they even thought about what outsiders would think – instead they just did what they knew they were supposed to do which is be faithful in the instructions given to them by the Lord to make disciples.
That’s not to say that outsiders were never attracted to the church, but it never was the church’s intention to attract.
For two, attraction is temporary. I know because I am (kind of) old. Unlike George Clooney, after a certain point, the older I get the less attractive I become. But this isn’t just true for our bodies; it is true for the church as well.
What may be considered to be attractive to the unchurched today will be considered passé tomorrow. At some point, every style, every fad, every building, every program becomes outdated. Our culture simply changes too much.
That being the case, there are two options: a church can either try to keep up with every passing attraction, burning through time, money, and resources, or we can continue to do what it is that we are called to and let the attractions come and go.
For three, attraction is an excuse not to love like we should. After all, if we can get people to come to the church, we won’t have to do the hard work of going to them, meeting them where they are, and teaching them to be disciples of Christ in their own context.
The right question for a church to ask is not “What will attract the unchurched” but “What will help us to be the Church to the unchurched?”
And there lies the crux of the matter. To ask what we can do to attract the unchurched is a question born out of ignorance. For even if we manage to attract the unchurched enough to get them in the door, it will not be our building, style or programs that keeps them there. They will stay because of who we are.
Perhaps we should consider whether it isn’t beyond the realm of possibility for the unchurched to be attracted to a church that refuses to try to attract them and seeks instead to remain faithful to Christ’s commands.
There’s only one way to find out.
So here is my challenge. Identify one thing you as a church are doing to attract the unchurched. Talk with those involved and ask these questions:
“What would it look like to stop relying on attraction in order to engage those who need this ministry?”
“What would we have to do differently in our church if we stopped relying on marketing and attraction to reach out?”
Whoah. Challenging. True. Yet, I can’t help but want to create an environment that is inviting to the unchurched. Statistics say??? My other problem is I was unchurched and hated the idea of going to a “traditional” building both as a nonbeliever and a new believer. So I’m one that goes against the majority of statistics. I think though, those who are “unchurched” in these surveys were probably also previously churched at some point as a child.
By: Shawn Congleton on February 2, 2010
at 9:54 AM
I know what you mean, Shawn. I think an “environment that is inviting” has more to do with the people and lived values than structure, though.
By: Ken Eastburn on February 2, 2010
at 1:12 PM
I guess right now as an unchurched believer I’d find a building that has been paid for really attractive.
Debt service isn’t ministry.
By: MDSF on February 2, 2010
at 1:04 PM
I agree. And there are definitely some churches that have their buildings paid for. And in such cases, it seems to me at least, they have a unique ability to respond to the call of God.
By: Ken Eastburn on February 2, 2010
at 1:13 PM
There’s indeed a bit of absurdity here with the press release contradiction. While I’m not surprised new church buildings are more contemporary in their design (coffee bars in the lobby…stadium theater seating), the idea that unchurched prefer cathedral designs makes me question who they asked?
Yet, it’s not very surprising since those questioned are likely indicating the design of the church building in which the grew up.
But the focus being on the building is wrong to begin with. While a number of unchurched people might more or less likely go to a building that has a steeple…more attendance will come from those who invite friends, coworkers, or neighbors to church.
Of course, there’s another check and balance here: would we invite the person into our home? Church is the Body of Christ – not a building – and therefore it is family. If we would invite someone into a church (a “safe” alternate location) but not into our home, we need to check our hearts. After all, a person might feel more comfortable coming into your home or small group then ever going to your church. Your willingness and openness is key here.
By: Rick Garner on February 2, 2010
at 10:14 PM
Great point about whether we would invite people into our home, Rick!
By: Ken Eastburn on February 3, 2010
at 7:40 AM
[...] back to the point at hand. Ken recently posted a great challenge to attractional churches entitled DEAR CHURCHES: STOP TRYING TO ATTRACT THE UNCHURCHED. Now before you dismiss this as heresy (which is easier to do than most of us would like to admit), [...]
By: remedyconnect.org -- it was never meant to be this way... on February 3, 2010
at 1:47 PM
“What would it look like to stop relying on attraction in order to engage those who need this ministry?”
Ok, here goes…what would it look like?
Well, it would look completely other than we are trying to make it look.
What do I mean?
First, I’m reminded that Jesus told the apostles to ‘wait’…until they had been indued with power from on high (Acts 1)…so I’m taking that as an indicator that we/the local body of believers, would join our hearts together in one accord and pray– waiting until the Holy Spirit begins to stir within us, the passion, relying upon His power to proceed in the continuation of the fulfillment of the Great Commission and set about to make disciples. (He knows how to deliver them…we learn how to disciple them…just like raising children, it’s a process and all are just a little different).
Asking Him to show each believer, where He is already at work so that we would join Him in the process.
But as I see it, this is seen as too risky and outside the box from the standard methods and practices for what could be the past 50+yrs.
So we continue to do what we’ve always (in recent history) done. And get more of the same, a trickle of new believers…instead I see (from Genesis 1) His instruction to be fruitful and MULTIPLY…His intention is not to ADD but to MULTIPLY…or am I taking this too far?
What happened at the birth of the church? Thousands were added (multiplied) to the beginning of the church. And just how was this accomplished? By obedience to the instructions of Jesus when He was about to depart/ascend to the Father. Does He know how to birth new believers into His Body? I think so!…but do we?
Why do we think there has to be a gimmick? (e. type of building, furnishing, type/style of music-comtemporary/traditional, order of service…you fill in the blank. Superficial. A major DISTRACTION to our assignment.)
These things aren’t the ‘issue’ they are the extras that come after, depending on the means/budget/priorities of the local body of believers. Besides, I’m convinced that He is able to supply all our needs according to His riches in Christ Jesus…so He is fully able to provide for the type of building/etc. He KNOWS what we need and when we need it (He’s got great timing), so don’t sweat the small stuff, lol;)
Personally, I see (I have had this position for a number of years) that we have the Plan backward. Why would we take it upon ourselves to try to reinvent the wheel. Doesn’t Jesus tell us that He will build His church…why are we trying to do this for Him…He is fully capable, desirous of doing just that! We waste so much valuable time/resources trying to do His job. AND it doesn’t work anyway….Do ya ‘spose He is miffed when we don’t do what He tells us to…I’m thinking, yes.
“What would we have to do differently in our church if we stopped relying on marketing and attraction to reach out?”
I think my first response has addressed this question already. Pray first, plan second…based upon His leading…He knows how to lead, as the Great Shepherd…trouble is we are sheep….its the following that trips us up.
And I submit to you that the primary target of ministry would be aimed at the MEN, the fathers, grandfathers, they are most likely the ones who have lived the life of mistakes (we know it as sin) and as we pray that the Holy Spirit will work in the heart, He will prepare the way.
Why do I say this?
When I read the N.T. I see that Jesus primarily went to the men. This isn’t an affront to women, but men are usually seen as the least or last aim of evangelism, as if too hardened/resistant. May I remind you that there is NOTHING too difficult for OUR GOD, amen!
As a child I attended the church where I later went back to as an adult. I only went there because I remembered that the S.S. teachers were truly loving women even if I barely remembered any of the Bible stories! I was looking for others who were REAL believers, not just attendees. And He was good to me by supplying some really fine Godly believing friends. The type/size/style of the building/furnishing etc. didn’t matter, just the Word and the fellowship…and the Wednesday evening prayer meetings! I became discipled eventually as He stirred the hunger in my soul to know Him more.
At the time I didn’t know how to get in His way, so He led the way…I followed…just need to keep that in the forefront of my thinking, everything else falls in place…eventually;)
Thanks for listening, even if you disagree.
By: Suze Kane on February 4, 2010
at 8:56 PM
Wow, Suze…thanks so much for chiming in and taking the time to think deeply about this! Look forward to your continued interaction around here.
By: Ken Eastburn on February 8, 2010
at 8:42 AM
Would it be fair to say that we should attract the unchurched through our lifestyle, not our buildings or programs?
Also, you mentioned that you don’t know of a church that isn’t interested in reaching
the lost. Is that an exaggeration? A tour through almost any church in the Midwest will tell otherwise.
By: Stan on February 16, 2010
at 7:39 AM
Hey Stan….yeah, I think that’s fair…kind of. I would add that any attraction people have to our lifestyles is the byproduct of our discipleship, not the result of something we did to actually try to attract them.
As far as reaching the lost in the Midwest, I wasn’t exaggerating, but perhaps you know something I don’t.
By: Ken Eastburn on February 16, 2010
at 7:46 AM
Finally I thought I was the only one ( the Elijah mindset) who thought like this. What is missing in the modern church is truth. Why would I want to go and hear the same materialistic teaching we here in the business world.
Another thing to remember is that, crustily old religious politics in the church is why many are not still in church. Buildings have been one of the biggest reason for people leaving the church. I look back as I pastored, I spent more time on the building than I did on building the Church. I have long since repented on that sin.
We need to be building up the families in our churches instead of more programs to overload the family.
The revival of the Church is waiting on us to start praying again.
By: Don on July 26, 2010
at 6:33 PM
Funny how churches and pastors are doing everything they can to attract people. They burn through money and resources, even people. People get burnt out by all of these things. People forget one thing that will attract people to the church. Jesus taught it.
John 12:32
32″And I, if I (AU)am lifted up from the earth, will (AV)draw all men to Myself.”
The Lord is the one who will attract people to the church. The problem with the churches is that a lot of pastors and its leaders has not taught that in churches. If a pastor or A church leader Lived like Christ, go through His death, embrace the cross and die daily. Then you will understand what attract the unchurch people. Pastors want to live the ressurrected life of Christ and yet refused to go through His death. It won’t work. Thats why people refused to come to church. When I say His death meaning, you stop being judgemental and critical among yourselves . Not just among yourself but also stop criticizing and judgin the unbelievers , whether they are satanist or gays and lesbian or even politicians or anybody. Stop being selfish, self centered and stop the self promotion within the church. You die daily. When you go the other side of the shoe, which is the unbelievers, you ask them why they are avoiding churches ? They saw the hypocrisy within the church. And that makes the church so unattractive. So now, you burn money and resources trying to think of ways to attract people ? it does not work that way. If you learn to die daily then you will now know what its like to live like Christ. The resurrected life of Christ will show the fruits of the Spirit, kindness, gentleness, faithfulness etc.
When we have all of that Fruits, in our daily walk, and we show that within our family where nobody can see. Doing the right thing when nobody can see. no more criticism, no more selfisness, no more self promotion , no more self centeredess nor jealousy, no more coveting of other people anointing , position in churches or whatever,As the bible said, if you are faithful in small things, you are going to be faithful in big things. THEN you will see people start coming to church.
By: sandra on August 25, 2010
at 10:54 AM
God’s plan to reach the world IS the church (not the building, but the disciples of Jesus).
I grow weary about everyone complaining about the Traditional/Formal Church. If you’ve got a better idea, then go for it. The best solution is the one that works, i.e. produces mature disciples.
We waste too much time and energy trying to get the traditional/formal Church to change the way they’re doing things. Broad is the way that leads to destruction…
God alone saves, and it is not our perfect ideas or how-to’s that cause this to happen. He alone is sovereign.
Instead of trying to figure it all out, just be filled with the Holy Spirit and let Him touch the lives of people around you, wherever you encounter them.
If you are indeed following Jesus, the unsaved will be drawn to Jesus in you, or they’ll hate you. Either way you have been successful.
If someone is saved, be sure to get them grounded in the faith and by all means, keep them away from those who preach a gospel of quaint moralism in place of a burning desire to glorify our Heavenly Father in Jesus Name.
By: MDV on June 21, 2011
at 12:53 PM