In Defense of Seeker Friendly Churches

[Apolojedi (Daniel Eaton)]

I wrote a blog on the topic. Thought we could discuss it here. Check it out and come back and comment....

[Rey Reynoso]

Just read the post. If I were a Calvinist I would say there's no such thing as a Seeker. That whats important is to go out and Preach and God will regenerate His Own.

[Otsukafan]

Daniel,

I humbly desend with your assertion that seeker friendly churches, are indeed, seeker friendly.

I don't think you could accuse any Church of being more "high church" or traditional than the Eastern Orthodox Church. Our parish itself is even more formal or traditional than your average Orthodox parish, yet we have seen the Baptism and Christmations this past year of people of all walks. From and FBI Agent to a Hippie artist. Former Biker to Son of Baptist preacher.

As is our custom we always eat together after our Liturgy on Sunday morning. You will be amazed at the diverse crowd of all ethnicity, age and profession, sitting and fellowshipping. I would submit that this is a natural result of us all participating in the Eucharist together before hand.

I would also submit that "seeker friendly" churches are in fact only friendly, sometimes wittingly and sometimes not, to a particular demographic, thus not exactly friendly to all seekers. The fact is, our remaining faithful to the worship handed down by the Apostles and our adherence to a sacramental life will draw all to Christ.

[James Gibbons]

The problem, for me, is not with the seeker or what he seeks. It’s what he finds. When someone comes seeking comfort, he should find the one who comforts. Too often, though, he finds self help advice with some proof texts. There is nothing irrelevant about the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And for my taste, it should be served strait. Just because someone is a seeker doesn’t mean he is weak or stupid.

You are a sinner. You need a savior. Here He is.

How hard is that? But in every “seeker-friendlly” church I’ve been to (which I admit is only two or three), that would be way too harsh, judgmental, and old-fashioned. Yet, most people know that they have sinned and come short of perfection (the Glory of God). So why water it down.

By the way, Daniel, I also have problems with three hymns, an anthem, a self-help sermon, a offering, and an alter call.

Also, I hope your case is going well. Please keep us posted so we can continue to pray.

[JL Vaughn]

Daniel,

I'm with Otsukfan. Mega-churches are generally successful because they 1) build where a lot of baby boomers are moving to and 2) deliberately seek to attract baby boomers. Some go after other demographics, but the mega-church movement has primarily been boomer driven.

Blessings.

[JacksonS]

Ya, I stand with James on this, the problem is not that these churches are attracting seekers but what does the seeker find when he finds what he finds. I am of the opinion that alot of these so called "churches" are merely personality cults. The gospel is not preached, and I think that often these churches grow to large sizes, but it is little more than a social club, an auditorium of people for sure, but if Christ is not worshiped, the scriptures are not expounded, and the sacraments not ministered... then it is just an auditorium. At best it is a sect of Christianity, not a church.

[Curt Lovelace]

Worship is for worshippers. Others are welcome.

[Apolojedi (Daniel Eaton)]

Otsukafan said:

I would also submit that "seeker friendly" churches are in fact only friendly, sometimes wittingly and sometimes not, to a particular demographic, thus not exactly friendly to all seekers. The fact is, our remaining faithful to the worship handed down by the Apostles and our adherence to a sacramental life will draw all to Christ.

First, let me say that it doesn't sound like you church is a "traditional" one. Just because I was contrasting the Seeker model to the traditional model doesn't mean that those are the only two models out there. It is just that most of the flack I hear about the Seeker model comes from the traditional camp.

And I agree that the Seeker model usually only targets a particular demographic. It is usually the demographic that it currently resides in. Just like there are different styles of worship and church format in other cultures doesn't mean that there are not also different sub-cultures and demographics here in the US that can have different styles that target those groups. And just as "doing church" in tribal Ghana the exact same way we do in Atlanta doesn't connect with them there, we should not expect that worshiping in the exact same way and style that tradition holds the Apostles did is some format that everyone in every culture needs to follow today. I'd disagree with the conclusion that your way of apostolic worship is going to draw all people. It will reach some, but not everyone.
D.

[Apolojedi (Daniel Eaton)]

JL Vaughn said:

Mega-churches are generally successful because they 1) build where a lot of baby boomers are moving to and 2) deliberately seek to attract baby boomers. Some go after other demographics, but the mega-church movement has primarily been boomer driven.

That hasn't been my experience. There are two churches that I'd call "mega-churches" in my area. One is more traditional and one is not. The more traditional one is full of every age group. The other is more geared to the below-40 crowd. I think that mega-churches are successful only when they provide the kinds of worship and programs that meed the needs of the demographics they target. D.

[Apolojedi (Daniel Eaton)]

Jackson Hoolahan said:

Ya, I stand with James on this, the problem is not that these churches are attracting seekers but what does the seeker find when he finds what he finds.

I concur. Sometimes they can find the truth. Sometimes not. My point is that there is a difference between the method and the message. If the message can be found, there isn't a problem with the method used to make it more widely available.
The problem that I have with some Seeker churches is that it does become about show and entertainment. But again, the lack of real message isn't the fault of the methodology. The traditional mega-church in my area has a 100+ member orchestra and 300+ member choir. Their "show" isn't any less of a "show" just because they sing some 200-year old hymn instead of a modern praise song with a praise band. It is just as scripted and methodical as the seeker-friendly church, but has a different demographic. And the fact that they are popular doesn't mean that their song choice or sermons are any more or any less a source of truth.

[Otsukafan]

Well, given that the "traditional" protestant evangelical church in America, differs from it's predecessor of say the 1950's, the church of the 1950's differs in style just as greatly of the church of the 1890's. You could follow gradual change back through time. The fact is that the protestant evangelical church has, at least in style, morphed as the culture has. So is it truly "seeker friendly"? Or a needed transition brought about by a drastic turn in culture?

First, let me say that it doesn't sound like you church is a "traditional" one. Just because I was contrasting the Seeker model to the traditional model doesn't mean that those are the only two models out there. It is just that most of the flack I hear about the Seeker model comes from the traditional camp.

[Apolojedi (Daniel Eaton)]

Otsukafan: I'm not sure where you live that you are seeing a lot of change, but I don't see it here in the Bible Belt.

[Apolojedi (Daniel Eaton)]

Looks like Michael is going to weigh in on the topic as well.
D.