At the outset, let me say I love the church. I deeply desire to see the church flourish! But unless you are living under a rock, you know the church is a mess. Of course, not you and your church—if you even belong to. a church! Just everyone else’s church.
The church is in the midst of an identity crisis. It does not know who it is, so the church does not know what they should be doing. And when you do not know who you are, you can become anyone’s and do anything.
Here are a few ways the church is struggling:
The church no longer determines the moral agenda for the country.
The church is in numerical free-fall.
While the population level in America rises, more churches are closing the door than new ones planted.
Young people are abandoning the church at an alarming rate.
The church splits along denominational boundaries, with each claiming superiority.
Mega-churches are growing at an alarming rate, while the smaller churches are going the way of the dinosaurs.
Pastors are disqualifying themselves, committing suicide, and leaving "ministry" at an alarming rate.
This is just a 30,000-foot view. It becomes uglier the closer one inspects, and I'm sure you could easily add to the list. There are a host of reasons for the downturn within the church. The lingering influence of Postmodernism, the racial issues inherent in our society, the political winds, and Covid-19 are just a few issues that are causing the church to bumble around like a chicken with its head cut off.
This landscape has forced the church to (re)examine itself. Moreover, everyone wants to know the magic formula to get the church back on track. At the risk of oversimplification, the church has adopted the following three postures to deal with the present crisis:
Posture 1– Bunker-Down
The bunker-down approach believes that what has worked in the past will work today. The church should not change its methods or message. The problem with the church is that it has adapted to the world. The church, they contend, has compromised its values. If the church would return to sound theology, gather throughout the week at the church building, and not compromise on its ethics, then the church might be able to thrive again. We might call these churches traditional. They are continuing in the traditions of the past with the hope that they will serve to bring renewal in the future.
Posture 2–Attractional:
This approach attempts to attract people to the church building through any means to make the church palatable. They contend that people find the church boring and outdated, and the answer is to make the church relevant once again. So their music is like a rock concert; the times before and after the service are like being at Starbucks; their sermons are like TED Talks; their kid's ministries are like being at a bounce house indoor playland. If the world thinks and finds "church" to be boring, then, they reason, we should seek to make it more fun and accessible. These churches perceive the present way to draw people into the church is through being hip and cool.
Posture 3–Missional Approach:
This approach seeks to move the church outside of the four walls of the church building. It aims to employ new methods by teaching its laity how to be the church in their neighborhoods and everyday life. Rather than do what has always been done (Bunker Down), and rather than seeking to attract people to a worship gathering (Attractional), this approach aims to push people to be the church outside the walls of the church building. The church should be the church in their neighborhoods, cities, and places of marginalization. “We are the church” is the mantra repeated in these faith communities.
There are various ways churches can bunker down, attract people, and be "missional." For example, the way one church bunkers down may not be the same way another one does. What one church uses to attract people will not necessarily be what another church uses. Yet, from a macro level, the church has seemingly postured itself in one of these three ways.
Each of these three postures possess temporal orientations. The bunker-down approach reverts to the past as the answer; the attractional posture is more of a present way of doing church; and many consider the future of the church to be the missional church.
Moreover, the energies required to employ these postures have been done with great intentions to revive the church. Many godly leaders are seeking to serve Jesus by leading their churches. However, each of these approaches is simply a method. They do not necessarily address the profound identity crisis that exists. A change in method will not address the deeper identity issues inherent within the churches.
We have bounced from one strategic method to another. We went from the church growth movement, to the purpose-driven church, to the emerging/emergent church, to the simple church, and now to the missional church. I am sure I forgot a few dozen other strategies. And ironically, in all of the fantastic methods, it seems the church becomes weaker with each new one.
To address the profound identity crisis, the church must go deeper than mere methodological shifts. This is not to say that methods and strategies are unimportant. The way the church structures itself inherently teaches the congregation what the church is. It is to say that simply choosing the "right" methodology will not bring the intended effects, for the church is not primarily facing a methodological issue; it is facing a theological one. Methods derive from a foundational belief system about the nature and purpose of the church.
Specifically, the church faces a theological story issue. The theological struggle of the church is not one of predestination versus free will, nor is it one of the right end-times view. The issue is that the church live out of a wrong story. It does not understand how the church fits into God’s unfolding drama. If the church does not change its foundational story, it will not fulfill its purposes within God’s missional story.
I would suggest that the church does not know its own story. Just ask yourself or another Christian the following question:
Where are the Streets of Gold located?1
I would venture a guess that most, if not all, Christians would say they are located in heaven. And I would politely tell you this is symptomatic of the mess in which we find ourselves.
Just think about this for a second. We do not even know the end of our own story! It is insane that we think heaven is the end of the world! That our final, eternal dwelling place is up in heaven. And if we do not know the end of the story, we necessarily miss the point of the beginning of the story, which means we mess up the middle.
More on that next time…
Whether the streets are literal or metaphorical, here is just one of the many places that depicts the streets of gold in heaven. https://www.gotquestions.org/streets-of-gold.html
I will admit that some of the "mega church" out there really helped me in seasons of my life where I wasn't afforded a stable living place. Their ability to produce sermons on Youtube was a lifeline for me on Sundays and throughout the week, so I could have some baseline as I had to move, and especially during the very isolating months of mid-2020.
However, there are things that in-person church provides that I can't ever get from a 1:many communication style a broadcast offers. I am grateful for both in my life, my local church and the ability to Google search for a sermon on-demand because my spirit is weak.
I have used Youtube sermons to share the Gospel with a few non-believers to mixed results. But it has been a good tool to have if just for the accessibility of information during the pandemic. It's a lot easier to say "Check out this cool Youtube video" and get agreement than to say "Come with me and check out my church on Sunday."
Definitely being on mission in 2021 is interesting!