How people choose a church

[Alan pavelin]

The Pew Research Centre conducted a poll a few years ago asking people why they chose the church they did, after for example moving to a different area. The most common reasons were the quality of the sermon, the welcome they got, how much they liked the style of worship, and the location of the church. Well behind these was the specific teachings of the church.
So what I’d like to hear people’s views about is whether “doctrinal purity” is, or even ought to be, a consideration in people’s choice of a church. If it’s not, doesn’t that make the religious wars of past centuries quite pointless, and no church should claim to be “the one true church” or whatever?

 

[JustaPewFiller]

This is just my 2 cents.

The answer is, "it depends" on where you draw the defining line on "doctoral purity" and who you are asking.

One pastor explained it to me this way... He said, "For your average Christian that is attends church fairly regularly, "high level doctrine" is important. They want to know where the church stands on homosexuality, for example. Now, if you get down deeper into some of the "ologies" and "isims", many of your average Christians that attend church nominally won't care about those or even know what they are. However, the pastor and few seasoned Christians or those with some form of theological education may care about those deeper doctrines very much."

As for proof on his point, I was attending a Baptist (GARBC) Church whose pastor had left. As part of the search for a new pastor the congregation took a survey that asked a series of questions about what was important to them in the church and in a potential new pastor. I knew from being in various meetings that there were 3 in the church who had all went to the same Bible college. Each of these 3 held very strict adherence to their interpretation of some of the "deeper doctrines" (the "ologies" and "isims" mentioned above) as the upmost importance.

These same 3 were shocked that only 3 people in the entire church ranked strict "doctrinal purity" as being the most important thing for the church or the new pastor. Overall, it came in near the bottom of the list overall.

 

[PloverWing]

The Pew Research Centre conducted a poll a few years ago asking people why they chose the church they did, after for example moving to a different area. The most common reasons were the quality of the sermon, the welcome they got, how much they liked the style of worship, and the location of the church. Well behind these was the specific teachings of the church.
So what I’d like to hear people’s views about is whether “doctrinal purity” is, or even ought to be, a consideration in people’s choice of a church. If it’s not, doesn’t that make the religious wars of past centuries quite pointless, and no church should claim to be “the one true church” or whatever?

I have spend much of my life in religious traditions that do not require doctrinal conformity. I was raised Southern Baptist, at a time when that Baptist community still believed in "soul liberty", the idea that the individual, prayerfully reading the Bible, is responsible for their own doctrinal discernment. I've spend some time with the Friends (Quakers), who value listening to the Inner Light individually and communally. My present community, the Episcopal Church, finds its unity in common worship, rather than in doctrinal uniformity, and some variation in doctrinal beliefs is expected and welcomed among our members. I feel comfortable in environments like this, where some diversity is considered acceptable, and I'm uncomfortable in environments where I'm expected to affirm beliefs that I think are false in order to be a member.

Everybody has "stoppers", and they're going to be different for different people. I can think of a few for myself, some beliefs that, if they were consistently preached and practiced in a congregation, would prevent me from becoming a member.

One principle relates to one of the lines in the Episcopal Church's baptismal vows: "Do you renounce all sinful desires that draw you from the love of God?" "I renounce them." There are -- not sinful desires, exactly, but teachings and practices in some Christian communities which draw me from the love of God. If I were worshipping with a congregation, and I found that week after week, the sermons and Christian education literature and general conversations were wearing me away spiritually, so that I was finding it hard to continue to love God, I would have to step away, for my spiritual health. (CF does this to me every so often, and at those times I take a break from CF for a month or two.) So I think my most important "stoppers" are the various teachings and practices that interfere with my ability to love and serve God.

 

[bèlla]

I don't think I could speak for anyone. What I prioritize may not be important to someone else and the reverse is true.

When we were considering churches in the past we went to their websites and read the doctrinal statements and bios. We visited one without doing so and liked it a lot only to discover their policy on gay marriage and stopped attending. Most of the churches in our area follow suit and a couple have openly gay pastors. We found another we liked that had a scandal and the pastor was forced to step down. Thankfully we were attending a satellite but nevertheless the board was culpable.

After that we needed a break and contemplated different traditions and explored their teachings to see if it was a good fit. We finally found someone we like whose teachings are edifying. He's more of an evangelist than a pastor but we'll have an opportunity to meet him in person. They're developing local groups to facilitate fellowship because he travels globally and that's a nice touch. We have weekly prayer meetings and we're being fed and that's most important.

I don't foresee us returning to a traditional church. I couldn't give up the level of teaching and ministry we receive and everyone's plugged in. And that makes a difference. If I'm going to be in a environment it would have to be with mature believers and others sincerely seeking the Lord. I don't need the programs or groups at this point. I require meatiness and depth.

That's what works for us but I wouldn't impress that on anyone else. We have related commitments that allow us to engage with believers through professional and personal interests. We're not isolated and the flexibility fits our lifestyle.

But some have additional needs they want to have met through the church that influences their decisions. Age, family, proximity, activities, etc.

~bella

 

[HTacianas]

The Pew Research Centre conducted a poll a few years ago asking people why they chose the church they did, after for example moving to a different area. The most common reasons were the quality of the sermon, the welcome they got, how much they liked the style of worship, and the location of the church. Well behind these was the specific teachings of the church.
So what I’d like to hear people’s views about is whether “doctrinal purity” is, or even ought to be, a consideration in people’s choice of a church. If it’s not, doesn’t that make the religious wars of past centuries quite pointless, and no church should claim to be “the one true church” or whatever?

When I went looking for a church the only consideration I had was finding the Truth. Not my truth or somebody else's truth but the Truth. Even if it conflicted with my feelings or opinions. You might say "doctrinal purity" was the only thing that mattered at all. Some group over here cannot hold to some idea while another group over there holds to an entirely different idea and they both hold the Truth. And I eventually found the Truth in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church doesn't follow some individual who stood up one day and said "the Church is wrong. Come follow me", or, "I found something in the bible I don't think anyone ever saw before. Come follow me". The Orthodox Church was founded by Jesus Christ in the first century and had held and taught the Truth ever since.

 

[David Lamb]

The Pew Research Centre conducted a poll a few years ago asking people why they chose the church they did, after for example moving to a different area. The most common reasons were the quality of the sermon, the welcome they got, how much they liked the style of worship, and the location of the church. Well behind these was the specific teachings of the church.
So what I’d like to hear people’s views about is whether “doctrinal purity” is, or even ought to be, a consideration in people’s choice of a church. If it’s not, doesn’t that make the religious wars of past centuries quite pointless, and no church should claim to be “the one true church” or whatever?

I find it sad that what a particular church teaches seems to be seen as so comparatively unimportant. Without making at least some investigation into the church's statement of faith, one could end up in a church that denied a basic doctrine like the deity of Christ. Also, usually I would expect a Christian to want to do this checking before moving to a new area, in a similar way that parents would investigate schools for their children.

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

The Pew Research Centre conducted a poll a few years ago asking people why they chose the church they did, after for example moving to a different area. The most common reasons were the quality of the sermon, the welcome they got, how much they liked the style of worship, and the location of the church. Well behind these was the specific teachings of the church.
So what I’d like to hear people’s views about is whether “doctrinal purity” is, or even ought to be, a consideration in people’s choice of a church. If it’s not, doesn’t that make the religious wars of past centuries quite pointless, and no church should claim to be “the one true church” or whatever?

The most important for me was that the Lord was present and the service was Christ centered, and that people loved one another.

 

[frienden thalord]

The Pew Research Centre conducted a poll a few years ago asking people why they chose the church they did, after for example moving to a different area. The most common reasons were the quality of the sermon, the welcome they got, how much they liked the style of worship, and the location of the church. Well behind these was the specific teachings of the church.
So what I’d like to hear people’s views about is whether “doctrinal purity” is, or even ought to be, a consideration in people’s choice of a church. If it’s not, doesn’t that make the religious wars of past centuries quite pointless, and no church should claim to be “the one true church” or whatever?

Long , long ago in a time before twitter
back in two thousand and six i had been drawn to the Lord .
A love for the TRUTH now put into my heart by GOD .
OH how i now hungered for the truth , the desire to know GOD
and Right into THA BIBLE i was put to learn and to grow .
NOW , it seemed every word i read , from every sentence to paragraph to chapter and book
Was just FULLFILLING my soul so very much .
Now in fast time i also had the desire to gather with other beleivers too .
SO on my journey to find said fellowship i went .
I went into a church . Man were the people friendly and very welcoming .
My goodness the praise was Dynomite , i was just joyous and praising the LORD .
Then began the sermon . I was empty , i was not lifted up .
YET every single time i had read the bible I WAS edified .
At the same time i had also turned on TBN and other gospel stations .
The preachers came on and began the sermon or teaching , MAN i was not edified at all .
NOW i didnt know back then , OF COURSE what i do know NOW .
anyway it was the same thing in every single church i visited . MAN the praise was great
man were the people so friendly to me , so very welcoming .
But then would come the sermon . Man how UNEDIFIED i was and empty i was .
BUT THE BIBLE , NOT SO , always rejoiced my soul to learn that .
NOW , it didnt take too long
for me to soon figure out WHY that was . THEMS PREACHERS , thems leaders
WERE FALSE . MY GOODNESS I MEAN FALSE . FALSE and FALSE .
but GOD had put a LOVE FOR TRUTH upon my heart and thus , THAT IS WHY their words were so empty to me .
SO if you want to know what i desire from a church . ITS LEADERS BETTER LOVE TRUTH
and not lies mixed with truths . THEY has better start preaching n teaching the truth Again .
ITS TIME to make biblical truth GREAT AGAIN in them churches .
Otherwise this gringo wont be sitting under them . EXPOSE them i will .
YOU SEE its been , BY GRACE over eighteen years ago
since GOD first drew me TO CHRIST and CHRIST NOW LEADS ME on the PATH i must GO .
DOCTRINE MATTERS pardner . TRUTH matters my friend .
And CHARITY , CHARITY , and again i say CHARITY REJOICES IN THE TRUTH , NOT INQUITY .
SO who reallly has the LOVE OF GOD UPON THEIR HEART
well its the heart THAT REJOICES IN THE WORD and THE WORDS of GOD . NOT IN INQUITY
NOT IN A LIE .

 

[frienden thalord]

When I went looking for a church the only consideration I had was finding the Truth. Not my truth or somebody else's truth but the Truth. Even if it conflicted with my feelings or opinions. You might say "doctrinal purity" was the only thing that mattered at all. Some group over here cannot hold to some idea while another group over there holds to an entirely different idea and they both hold the Truth. And I eventually found the Truth in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church doesn't follow some individual who stood up one day and said "the Church is wrong. Come follow me", or, "I found something in the bible I don't think anyone ever saw before. Come follow me". The Orthodox Church was founded by Jesus Christ in the first century and had held and taught the Truth ever since.

you might say doctrinal purity was the only thing that mattered .
You do realize there is a book , I KNOW by grace , have learned and loved to read daily by grace
and its doctrine , MY MY , ITS PURE . the problem is
most about every church i visited seemed to twist and omit parts of that doctrine
to fit they own precepts and doctrines . OH , i gots to say it again , BIBLE TIME CHURCH
learn FOR YOURSELVES the beauty of the truth so PURE within that book it can expose even the slightest error of any man
who cometh to twist a doctrine unto ya . OH Yes . Been over eighteen years now
GOD has had me in that book , reading it daily and i gotta say , IT JOYS THE SOUL TO DO SO
and to do so with others too . but i also gotta say , IT DEPRESSES the heck out of me to see what most churches
now sit under and seem to love .

 

[frienden thalord]

now dont come with stones and accusations , come with questions if something seems unclear
with what i wrote . .

 

[Reasonably Sane]

The Pew Research Centre conducted a poll a few years ago asking people why they chose the church they did, after for example moving to a different area. The most common reasons were the quality of the sermon, the welcome they got, how much they liked the style of worship, and the location of the church. Well behind these was the specific teachings of the church.
So what I’d like to hear people’s views about is whether “doctrinal purity” is, or even ought to be, a consideration in people’s choice of a church. If it’s not, doesn’t that make the religious wars of past centuries quite pointless, and no church should claim to be “the one true church” or whatever?

I moved from Seattle to rural Kentucky 13 years ago. The first church we went to was a mile from our house on our little back road. We liked the people, but the teaching became frustrating. Then one of the elders got really angry with me about my beliefs about hell (I believe in CI). and one guy was confessing to having a beer in the same way a married guy would confess to cheating on his wife. I refuse to be an argumentative spirit so we left that church. The second one had a similar issue. I recommended to our pastor a facebook page called "rethinking hell". He went there and started arguing with the people there in an incredibly disrespectful and, frankly, ignorant way. I was embarrassed for our church. They had to ban him from the page because of his rudeness.

Then I found the church I attend to this day. They don't necessarily agree with me on everything (who does?), but I'm free to discuss and we have some very interesting discussions. I've played in the worship band for about 7 years now. I've also taught Sunday School.

 

[bèlla]

The second one had a similar issue. I recommended to our pastor a facebook page called "rethinking hell". He went there and started arguing with the people there in an incredibly disrespectful and, frankly, ignorant way. I was embarrassed for our church. They had to ban him from the page because of his rudeness.

Then I found the church I attend to this day. They don't necessarily agree with me on everything (who does?), but I'm free to discuss and we have some very interesting discussions. I've played in the worship band for about 7 years now. I've also taught Sunday School.

I'm glad you found a home after the earlier challenges. I don't understand why pastors get involved in verbal fisticuffs online. It never looks good and usually goes too far. Which results in humiliating screen shots or removal as you've described.

~bella

 

[Reasonably Sane]

I'm glad you found a home after the earlier challenges. I don't understand why pastors get involved in verbal fisticuffs online. It never looks good and usually goes too far. Which results in humiliating screen shots or removal as you've described.

~bella

The thing is, people would argue via the merits of their arguments - regardless of which side they are on. Yet his response to a very well worded and thoughtful argument was, and I quote, "All I see here are lies!" He was angry because he could not come close to countering their arguments. He simply believed what he believed and had never had to support his beliefs. To be fair, in this geographical area, there is rarely need to defend your beliefs. It's one huge silo. Until guys like me step in. Thing is, living in Seattle, I was forced to back up what I claimed to believe. It caused me to research and, frankly, change a lot of my beliefs. But in the bible belt it's a bit different.

I changed churches after that one.

 

[Richard T]

The Pew Research Centre conducted a poll a few years ago asking people why they chose the church they did, after for example moving to a different area. The most common reasons were the quality of the sermon, the welcome they got, how much they liked the style of worship, and the location of the church. Well behind these was the specific teachings of the church.
So what I’d like to hear people’s views about is whether “doctrinal purity” is, or even ought to be, a consideration in people’s choice of a church. If it’s not, doesn’t that make the religious wars of past centuries quite pointless, and no church should claim to be “the one true church” or whatever?

Great topic. The best way is to let God choose the church. If this occurs and you get the wrong church, He can sure make things uncomfortable until you switch. Of course doctrine is important and I like the poster who mentioned "stoppers" or certain things that you could not compromise on. Stoppers that I think about are: a lack of warmth and love, certain end time beliefs, no eternal security, weakness on what Jesus accomplished on the cross, an attitude of works, and the failing to recognize the Holy Ghost and power.

1 Corinthians 2:4-5 (KJV) 4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: 5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

In general, I avoid too much prosperity gospel or anything unbalanced. Few distractions, extended offerings or announcements. I like services that are not over 2 hours, unless there is some serious need and anointing. I also prefer a church where the congregants are engaged. Just like classrooms can have different levels of student engagement, Churches have that too. I have a working hypothesis that more engagement is correlated with higher growth. This is rare but there are churches where the Holy Spirit leads the service and anyone is allowed to make a contribution. To some this might seem scary, but the pastor becomes more of a conductor, who allows or denies based on his leadings, time, and having everything be decent and in order. This is the early church and it is expanding to the latter church. I think such a biblical church requires discernment and participation from all.
1 Corinthians 14:26 (KJV)
26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
Hebrews 5:14 (KJV)
14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

 

[eleos1954]

The Pew Research Centre conducted a poll a few years ago asking people why they chose the church they did, after for example moving to a different area. The most common reasons were the quality of the sermon, the welcome they got, how much they liked the style of worship, and the location of the church. Well behind these was the specific teachings of the church.
So what I’d like to hear people’s views about is whether “doctrinal purity” is, or even ought to be, a consideration in people’s choice of a church. If it’s not, doesn’t that make the religious wars of past centuries quite pointless, and no church should claim to be “the one true church” or whatever?

The sheep are scattered across the earth .... the true church are those in Christ.

 

[David Lamb]

The sheep are scattered across the earth .... the true church are those in Christ.

True, but the New Testament shows that the sheep are to be gathered into local groups known as churches. For instance, the epistles are mainly addressed to "the church at........."

 

[okay]

I am in the process of finding a new church, and for me the requirements (in no particular order) are
1. Short drive from home
2. Even if non-creedal, should basically agree with what I see in the Nicene or Apostle’s Creed.
3. Welcoming, loving, intergenerational community.
4. Healthy approach to non-essential differences: humility, encouraging people to follow their conscience, and not judging.
5. Bible studies and/or other opportunities for spiritual formation
6. Acceptable sermons with no problematic theology. This does not mean that I need to agree with everything from the pulpit.
7. I am on-board with the allowed roles of women in the church
8. I am on-board with how lgbtq folks are included in church and their allowed roles

Nice-to-have
1. Worship service in my favorite style
2. Above-average (or better) sermons.


Deal breakers in no particular order (and non-exhaustive I am guessing…)
1. Politics from (or politicians in) the pulpit
2. An approach to scripture that I find unhelpful or hurtful to my faith.
3. Many many more American flags in the sanctuary than crosses (I have family in a church like this)
4. So small that it looks like the church is dying. Also, lack of any children.
5. anti-science
6. Terrible sermons
7. Harmful doctrine
8. A church where one person has all the power with no true checks.
9 heretical teaching
10 dehumanizing language about any person or group

 

[Alan pavelin]

I find it sad that what a particular church teaches seems to be seen as so comparatively unimportant. Without making at least some investigation into the church's statement of faith, one could end up in a church that denied a basic doctrine like the deity of Christ. Also, usually I would expect a Christian to want to do this checking before moving to a new area, in a similar way that parents would investigate schools for their children.

My view on that is that every church should, as a basic minimum, accept the truths of the Nicene Creed, whether or not it recites it in the liturgy. That meets your point on the deity of Christ.

 

[Alan pavelin]

When I went looking for a church the only consideration I had was finding the Truth. Not my truth or somebody else's truth but the Truth. Even if it conflicted with my feelings or opinions. You might say "doctrinal purity" was the only thing that mattered at all. Some group over here cannot hold to some idea while another group over there holds to an entirely different idea and they both hold the Truth. And I eventually found the Truth in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church doesn't follow some individual who stood up one day and said "the Church is wrong. Come follow me", or, "I found something in the bible I don't think anyone ever saw before. Come follow me". The Orthodox Church was founded by Jesus Christ in the first century and had held and taught the Truth ever since.

 

[Alan pavelin]

What Christ founded wasn’t just what today we know as the Orthodox Church, the East-West split wasn’t to happen for 1,000 years. The early church, as it evolved, became a number of “patriarchates”, or super-dioceses, several in the East plus Rome (the biggest) in the West. All were equally valid, Rome being regarded as “first among equals” purely because of its size (probably also because Peter and Paul both ended up there). All the ecumenical councils, which determined doctrine, were held in the East, but were fully accepted by all.