Struggles and reservations about commiting to any church group

[dms1972]

As a child I was taken to church regularly and then in my teens and early twenties I drifted. I then attempted to re-enter the church scene but have struggled with that quite a bit and`I am not keen at times on what I find in the churches I have been to (admittedly only a few). In these churches there has been a emphasis on House Group membership and an attempt to get more members into house groups (a mid week get together) . House groups within churches I know may differ very much from each other. Some are more heavily into social events, others like to focus on Bible study. I know they may be beneficial for people who feel they get overlooked in a biggish congregation and can help people make friendships. However I find they can become a burden when its required that members be at each event or outing they hold. I think what would be better might be a few newcomers groups that aim to integrate people into church life.

During my stint away from church I questioned almost everything about what I believed and why I believed it including whether I believed out of conformity or not. One of the last churches I went to was trying to be a bit innovative, and held seeker services. They actually sent people to the Willow Creek church in the US to learn a bit about how they did it. I wasn't sure whether their approach was transferable to a congregation in another country. In all the innovation with music and film during the service - I wondered at times if the Gospel message was kind of getting a bit lost. Another thing they did I wasn't very comfortable with was they would have break-out sessions in the main evening service, everyone would get into groups and they'd discuss something about how we "did church". It was friendly enough and I kept going back for eight years or so, then eventually both pastors moved on to other churches and a new young pastor quit after a disagreement with elders and I drifted again.

I went back a while later and it had changed a lot. Previously they had a sort of surround / pulpit up a couple of steps where the minister lead from, this (at least on this occasion) had gone and the worship band occupied the stage. There was a lecturn now on the same level as the congregation. Maybe its just me but I like to be able to see the minister - I have a sort of irrational fear come over me when I can't.


I have my reservations about submitting any local church until I can get a good idea what they are about. In a sense I like to vet them, but I don't find they always like people doing this.

 

[BobRyan]

I have my reservations about submitting any local church until I can get a good idea what they are about. In a sense I like to vet them, but I don't find they always like people doing this.

you bring up a lot of good topics in your OP.

I have a poser for you --

In the Bible we are told that the world continued in some form of rebellion against God for about 1600 years after Adam was created.
It ended in a world wide flood according to Gen 6-9 - but not before Noah spent 120 years building the ark and warning mankind.

If you lived somewhere before the time of Noah's ark-building project then maybe your main focus would be to choose God over rebellion, be a child of God. So then using the terms of your OP -- you would pick some Christian club/group and be counted as a Christian.

But if you lived somewhere near the end of the ark-building project - the urgency of the moment may have caught your attention. The Bible says all of humanity perished except for 8 people.

So my question for you is - how do you know that you are not now in the equivalent of that same end-point situation today?

 

[dms1972]

Well thats a theological question about the end times, whats its relevance to my post?.

 

[dms1972]

I find the churches I have been to are interested in what I would call churchianity, churchy activity. Sometimes they are trying to break out of traditional forms and be a bit innovative. They think four hymns, a sermon and a prayer, results in some people perhaps just going through the motions, so they keep updating it, till you walk in and think what on earth is on tonight?

I used to think in my teens - who would want to go to a church nowaday - they are a bit fuddy duddy, but while they maybe can be that sometimes - I think there may sometimes be good reasons as to why things are done the way they are. So basically I used to think churches should be a bit more innovative but now I have experienced some of those "innovative services" I long for the more tried and tested "old fashioned" form of service again.

 

[Paidiske]

Any church that isn't willing to be vetted is probably not a healthy place.

Apart from that, maybe a smaller church with a more liturgical style would suit you better?

 

[dms1972]

What should I be looking for when checking out a local church?

 

[Paidiske]

Well, in some ways, that's a very personal question, but I'd be looking for:

- Is this a safe and healthy community?
- Are there opportunities to contribute, using my gifts in service?
- Do they have an understanding of mission, and a way of living that out, that is bearing fruit?
- Do they have an openness to God at work in the world and in other churches, or do they see everything that's not them as an enemy or a threat?
- Do they have a theological framework that makes sense to me and that I can, largely, accept?

 

[dms1972]

Thanks those are good points.

I think as regards safe and healthy - one has to accept some folks may be struggling with issues, becoming a christian doesn't solve everything, in a flash. I would hope that the leaders or core members though were mature and safe individuals, with good boundaries.

A church i went to mentioned above had a young woman start attending who was "paranoid schizophrenic". She sometimes seemed to be very distressed during services, and at other times she'd approach people suddenly and ask stuff. I passed her once in the street on my bike and she shouted after me to STOP! She be fine at one moment then seemed really distressed the next. She also was greatly interested in whether others were walking closely with the Lord, but then at other times wanted Satan to be cast out of her. The church however was simply not gifted or experienced to deal with her unfortunately. Not sure where she is at now, but did pray for her to find the support she needed.

 

[Paidiske]

To my mind, a safe and healthy church will be able to provide space for people who are struggling, without allowing that to harm those around them.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

I think churches sometimes put too much emphasis on themselves. As a Christian, I have Christian and non-Christian friends and my Christian friends don't all go to my church. I find fellowship in different ways and don't feel I have to participate in everything my church offers. I also have social anxiety so small groups are just not for me. Unfortunately, I've run into quite a few churches that really push their small groups. The attitude borders on "real Christians participate in small groups." It's as though you aren't a serious Christian if you just come on Sunday and pass on everything else. I feel the body of Christ extends to all Christians whether we attend the same local church or not. For someone like me, finding fellowship in a way I am comfortable with, is essential. I don't like having my arm twisted to attend a small group or some men's group.

Fortunately, I am 62 years old now so in some churches they don't put as much pressure on men my age to be active in the men's ministries. The problem is, I don't look my age and most people mistake me for 15+ years younger so I still get the pressure. "Serious Christian men" are supposed to be in a men's group, go to the men's breakfast, and join an accountability team. Failure to do all of the above makes one suspect of not being serious or having something to hide.

I am not a night owl but neither am I an early bird. Doing anything at 6am does not work for me. Yet, a lot of men's studies occur at 6am on weekdays. I get it. Do it before men have to get to work (do any women's groups do this now that more women work?). However, no amount of coffee gets me alert at 6am. Instead of participating and contributing, I just sit there in a fog wishing I was at home in bed. Why not a 10pm men's group? I would have gone for that. If you say that cuts into time with your spouse, well going to be extra early to get up for a 6am men's group has the same effect. At least I would feel like talking at 10pm. Needless to say, the 6am study did not work for me. I also don't want to do a 7 or 8 am men's breakfast.

I have never been one to have a lot of friends. One or two do me just fine. I usually find I don't have much to talk about with other men. I don't golf, hunt, or fish. I watch some sports but my hometown teams that are across the country from where I live now so I don't even follow the local teams. I was a software engineer during my career. Very technical. Not something to discuss with the guys. Most of my friends are women (I am divorced now and not married women). I just don't relate to other guys that much.

I want a church that will back off when they realize someone is not the "sign up for everything" type. Just let us be. We will find our way.

 

[dms1972]

I feel there are similiarities in what I am looking for in a church. Of course there are variations from one congregation to another, but I find in a few I have been to there has been a something of a shift towards 'making disciples' and I wonder what happened before? Because what is really coming in seems to be a church growth model. For instance one church I went to had composed a five year vision paper, part of that vision involved increasing the numbers attending home-groups. Well I think what previously happened was less programmatic, it was more Kingdom centred, and for some reason that focus has shifted and become focused on 'our church' and what we want it to be like. I think it has a fair bit to do with the influence of some of the mega-churches.

There also seems sometimes to be the the mistaken notion that, if initial conversion doesn't deal with any emotional issues someone might have, discipleship will take care of them. I don't say one follows the other, but their can sometimes be a neglect of ministry for the latter with those who need it. Some christians may be committed yet stymied in their discipleship and relating within the fellowship because of need of 'inner healing'.

 

[dms1972]

-

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

While we want to reach people for Christ, numbers don't tell the story. You might have a lot of people attending but very few actually believe. I would rather not have all the bells and whistles and see who really wants to be there. While there is nothing wrong with making church a comfortable place, we seem to be bowing to the culture with our inclusion of lots of video and near professional music. It's the entertainment generation with short attention spans. So keep the sermons brief and no boring doctrine! The sermons must be topical, change frequently, and be about "relevant" topics. There is a fine line between adopting the culture and watering down or dumbing down the message.

I am a big proponent of expository, verse-by-verse, book-by-book preaching. It's the best way to learn the Bible and to see things in context. Topical teaching tends to lean towards topics the pastor/elders think are relevant, applicable to everyday life, and nothing too doctrinal or controversial. Yet Scripture itself tells us that "all Scripture" is profitable. Who are we to pick and choose and usually avoid certain hard teachings in the Bible?

I am church hunting after moving to a new town. There is one church that has several campuses. It looks like different pastors at different campuses give messages that then get broadcast to the other campuses. Most of the time, they do 3 part series. Looking back for a few months I see these topics: finances, communication, the purpose of marriage, restoration, resilience, remembering, relationship, intentionality, celebration, gifts/time/abilities, royal priesthood, ... Naturally they bounce between different books of the Bible often basing all three sermons in a series on one verse. The problem I have with that is that it could take years or decades (if ever) to hear teaching on every verse in a book. That book would never be taught as a whole. They do have some Bible survey classes but those are saved for Sunday school classes.

This touches upon my comment on what the purpose of the church gathered is. I think the main service(s) should be expository, verse-by-verse, book-by-book teaching. Save the topics for classes. Not everyone has time for the classes but if they make anything it will be a regular service. Since your preaching should be aimed at the believers in attendance, give them the meat. Instead, these churches try and cater to the unchurched and stick to lighter, topical series for their services. They don't want their services to seem like a Bible study! That might bore people and hurt attendance. Yet how many who attend their services ever make it to those Bible survey classes? It seems the priorities are backward. We cater to non-believers in our services or those who are very new in Christ. Good preaching can appeal to all levels. If you teach in an understandable way and define terms, you don't have to lose anyone. I think the fallacy is their claim that they have these other classes for mature believers yet how many of them make it to those classes? If the "church gathered" is about believers coming together for worship and edification, why do we cater to non-believers? I've been studying the Bible my whole life. I know it inside and out. Most Christians though don't study the Bible as I have. What they hear on Sunday mornings might be all the teaching they get. We are increasingly turning out baby Christians who can only drink milk. No wonder they get easily deceived by cults and false doctrines. They don't have a firm foundation. When churches measure success by the numbers, that's what you get.

 

[Paidiske]

Of course there are variations from one congregation to another, but I find in a few I have been to there has been a something of a shift towards 'making disciples' and I wonder what happened before? Because what is really coming in seems to be a church growth model.

My sense is that in a lot of churches, they are shrinking, and their congregations are aging. They have realised that unless they do something different, after they['ve buried their current members, they'll be closing their doors. No longer can our surrounding culture be relied on to bring people to church by default. So unless we're intentional about reaching new people, building relationships, and so on, all we're doing is ministering to God's waiting room (I hate that phrase, but it's a common one to describe this situation).

So given the choice between probably closing, and trying to do new things, most are trying to do new things (with varying levels of success). Not that success is all about numbers, but the cold hard reality is that numbers do matter for churches to function.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

My sense is that in a lot of churches, they are shrinking, and their congregations are aging. They have realised that unless they do something different, after they['ve buried their current members, they'll be closing their doors. No longer can our surrounding culture be relied on to bring people to church by default. So unless we're intentional about reaching new people, building relationships, and so on, all we're doing is ministering to God's waiting room (I hate that phrase, but it's a common one to describe this situation).

So given the choice between probably closing, and trying to do new things, most are trying to do new things (with varying levels of success). Not that success is all about numbers, but the cold hard reality is that numbers do matter for churches to function.

I don't know the answer, but my question is: is that working? Numbers may be up but how many are believers? For years now the trend has been for churches to build big campuses with lots of amenities and big staffs. Maybe not in small towns but in urban areas and many suburbs. All that requires a lot of giving to support. I question if we really need all that? I live in Mormon country. I do respect how they get three churches to share one facility. That won't work for a church that already has three services but I see so much duplication of facilities that largely sit empty most of the week. Do we really need all that. Some of the best churches I attended met in school gymnasiums. Now we need a lot of attendees just to afford all the stuff we bought to attract them. Harder to preach the word freely when you are worried about losing people and not being able to afford all your stuff...

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

My sense is that in a lot of churches, they are shrinking, and their congregations are aging. They have realised that unless they do something different, after they['ve buried their current members, they'll be closing their doors. No longer can our surrounding culture be relied on to bring people to church by default. So unless we're intentional about reaching new people, building relationships, and so on, all we're doing is ministering to God's waiting room (I hate that phrase, but it's a common one to describe this situation).

So given the choice between probably closing, and trying to do new things, most are trying to do new things (with varying levels of success). Not that success is all about numbers, but the cold hard reality is that numbers do matter for churches to function.

If Christianity is on the decline, maybe the time is coming when we go back to house churches? Many churches would shut their doors if giving lost its tax exempt status which could yet happen. That would show what our priorities were.

 

[Paidiske]

I don't know the answer, but my question is: is that working? Numbers may be up but how many are believers? For years now the trend has been for churches to build big campuses with lots of amenities and big staffs. Maybe not in small towns but in urban areas and many suburbs. All that requires a lot of giving to support. I question if we really need all that? I live in Mormon country. I do respect how they get three churches to share one facility. That won't work for a church that already has three services but I see so much duplication of facilities that largely sit empty most of the week. Do we really need all that. Some of the best churches I attended met in school gymnasiums. Now we need a lot of attendees just to afford all the stuff we bought to attract them. Harder to preach the word freely when you are worried about losing people and not being able to afford all your stuff...

I've only ever worked in small churches (except for a time as a student, when I worked for a cathedral, but that's a different sort of beast), and I live in a place where anything big enough to support multiple staff etc. is extremely rare. So I can't comment on the kind of thing you're describing. What I can say, though, is that people often imagine that the threat of losing donations is inhibiting for a preacher. In my experience, the far bigger inhibitor is bullying behaviour by a congregation who want to control the message, and they can become more intense about that if they feel their church's survival is threatened.

As for house churches, what I'm seeing where I am is a sort of hybrid model emerging; small groups meet for worship and study in people's homes, but then travel some distance to go to a service in a church with communion etc. That might be driven by necessity in rural areas.

 

[dms1972]

There are House Churches, for clarity that is not the same thing as I mean by 'house groups' which presuppose attendence at larger fellowship through which one accesses or is put with a house group. Its possible of course that someone not yet attending the church might be invited by a house group leader to their group with a view of gradually introducing them to their church fellowship. No problem with any of that as long as I don't have to attend a house group every week or fortnight. Basically this sort of 'house groups' set up however changes the dynamic of the fellowship somewhat because some of the house group folks are hunting around for their fellow house group members and leaders are running around trying to find out if they are going to the next social get-together the house group has planned. When that is the case something has shifted. The relational dynamics within these groups may be more inward, than outward.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

I do see where some churches become very inward-focused. They can keep you so busy that you would never have time for relationships outside the church. Some call these "holy huddles." If we use our earthly families as a guide, you might be very close to your family but that doesn't mean you spend all your free time with them or have no outside friends. We can't be salt and light if we are only in the company of our local church family. We also tend to go to churches that are like-minded to us. That's understandable but you can miss out on other perspectives as well as being another perspective.

Some churches almost demand you be totally transparent in these groups or in a men's accountability group. I am not totally transparent with anyone except God. I choose carefully those I share with and what I share. Not everyone needs to know everything about me and if I need help or advice, I want to pick the right person. Just because I join a house group doesn't mean I will go on to be close to all those people. I prefer to pick my friends and confidants and not pick a group that already exists. I don't like feeling forced or pressured into joining a group.

I had an interesting conversation with an elder at a church I attended years ago. He was in charge of an upcoming men's retreat and signups were starting that day. He cornered me after church and encouraged me to sign up for the retreat. I asked him for more information. Was there a theme or topic? Was there an itinerary? Was there a speaker? He indicated that the details were still being worked on. He said he had a speaker. I asked who the speaker was and what he would be talking about. He said he was leaving it up to the speaker to pick a topic. I told him that I would wait for more details before making a decision.

He protested that he might not have all the details figured out before the signups were closed. I answered that he was asking me to give up an entire weekend (I was married with 3 children at the time) and to do so I needed to weigh if I thought it was the best use of my time. He said that hanging out with the men of the church should be all I needed to know. The rest was just details. I could have told him that hanging out with the men of the church for a weekend was about as interesting to me as getting a root canal but I am not mean! I just said that I thought it was reasonable to want to know basic information about the weekend and without it, I could not commit to attending. He walked off with a disappointed and disapproving look.

That's the type of thing I don't like. That was a bit too much arm-twisting for me. He should have been a bit more organized before having signups. It's one thing to announce it well in advance to get it on people's calendars but don't expect them to sign up and pay before you have any details figured out. For some men that would have been enough but he tried to make me feel bad for not blindly signing up. I need a church that will accept if I choose not to get involved in their activities. I am more likely to respond to individual needs than group events.

I won't go to churches that are demanding or controlling. Let me find my way.

 

[seeking.IAM]

I won't go to churches that are demanding or controlling. Let me find my way.

I think many modern churches are often chasing their own tails trying to acquire new members. Just as business organizations are influenced by the last great business book written, I think church programming is too often influenced by the latest book or seminar on how to grow and sustain a congregation. Then the church tries to put everyone into the formula it has been led to believe will work. Only it doesn't. The church is great at trying to force the square peg into the round hole. And, for many people it doesn't fit. I think it is important for churches to find out what inquirers are looking for and to try to incorporate them into the life of the church in the manner the inquirer values without pushing folks out of their comfort zone. I go to church for corporate worship. I am not interested in your fellowship group...and I'm certainly not coming to your potluck. More power to the persons that derive something positive from that. There is nothing wrong with it, but it's not why I go to church. When I headed off to college at age 18 I reassured my mother I would still go to church, but I told her I was never going to another potluck as long as I lived. I've pretty much kept both those promises.


In my former denomination, I had a pastor whose sermon schtick always included something like, "Turn to the person in the pew next to you and tell them... (something God has done in your life this week) or (Jesus loves you and so do I)" or something like that. You get the idea. I couldn't stand it. Instead, I warmly greeted my neighbor, told them I didn't do this (foolishness), wished them a good week, and finally started looking for a new church that is fine with the person I am.