Are we a “Contemporary” or “Traditional” church? I wish I had a dollar gallon of gasoline for each time I’ve been asked that question. I’d like to answer, “Neither” for though on the surface HPC appears very traditional, we want to break free of both categories.
Why? Well for one thing, contemporary and traditional visions of the ministry and nature of the church often intersect in ironic ways. One intersection occurs at the fundamental nature of outreach. Both the contemporary ‘seeker sensitive’ and the militantly traditional churches act as if outreach occurs when people come to church. (I know this is an oversimplification, but there is an element of truth here.) Both expect non-Christians to come to the church and both assume that that is where evangelism will happen. The contemporary ministry responds to this conviction by making itself attractive enough so that more will come. The traditional church does not change, and so few come. But the expectation is the same for both because they share a common assumption.
It is, however, a flawed assumption.
Rarely will the non-Christian in our day enter a church. He sees no need to do so, and he sees no relevance of the church to his real life. There is nothing he sees in the church which would make him think that the church has anything to offer him. Merely changing the environment of the church from ‘traditional’ to ‘contemporary’ does not change the fundamental attitude that most in our culture share. For that, we must rethink ministry.
That a rethinking is necessary is a point made by Jim Petersen in several books published by Navpress. This quote, from his book Lifestyle Discipleship makes the point better than I could:
“As our society abandons its foundations of biblical religion and gropes its way toward neo-paganism, certain things become obvious. For one, the distance between biblical truth and modernity’s mind-set is widening. Truth of any kind, even the kind that science can offer, is being rejected. Gross contradictions are in. People are creating their own designer religions, and if we happen to object on the basis of reason, it is we who are the bigots. America is as religious as ever, but we are changing gods.
”What this means in practical terms is that our basic strategy for connecting with the unbelieving world is going to have to change. Until now, our assumption has been that somehow, sooner or later, we can manage to get them to come to us. That assumption is becoming increasingly unrealistic. A certain percentage will come, perhaps enough to keep us distracted and even feeling successful, but the vast majority will not. For them, what we do in church is irrelevant.“ (page 27)
The issue is not really whether we are ‘contemporary’ or ‘traditional’ when we are not understanding the mindset of the culture we have been called to reach.
I’m curious what you think. Is this an accurate assessment of the American culture in which we live? If so, what rethinking of ministry does it suggest to your mind?
Rebekah
I think that’s a good assessment of the traditional/modern/seeker friendly sort of situation as it relates to the religous climate we’re in. Since people aren’t seeking out churches, the style of the church isn’t important–it’s more the people that are in it, and that issue forth from it. As people go forth from the church and encounter people outside of it, that’s the more meaningful reflection of the Body of Christ that people are looking at when they think of Christians. If there are authentic people and relationships to be had, and they are truly seeking Christ (or initially just some kind of meaning in life), I really don’t think they care if the church is contemporary or traditional.
Gail and Keith
Yes, it is a correct assessment of today’s religious culture. Traditional? Contemporary? Change the name of the church to entice people to come in the doors? It will attract some people, but what will reach people is the individual church member going out into the world and engaging the culture; becoming involved in the lives of those around us. G
Anonymous
Hey Randy,Interesting topic. I agree with you that the issue is not so much traditional vs contemporary, but that our society in general simply does not see church as a necessity. Perhaps that’s where we need to begin thinking: how do we make them see their need? I also agree with Rebekah and Gail. Individual christians need to be good neighbors, good friends, good workers, good citizens, good people. If they like us, and we are a reflection of our church, then they may like our church as well.Tom