Now that we have briefly surveyed missional meaning and missional motivations, we can continue to unpack the myriad qualities that might make up a missional church.
My aim in this series is not to cast "missional" as a trend for evangelicalism or a program within a church, but to cast it as something our churches can intentionally and wholly be. This sort of begs the question, then, "If a church is not missional, what is it?" There are of course, for better or worse, as many kinds of churches as there are kinds of people, but if we're to look at the prevailing, most influential mode of church in evangelicalism we have to look at what is often called the "attractional church."
The attractional movement might be said to have begun with the rise of the seeker church movement -- Willow Creek in Illinois and Saddleback in California being the two biggest pacesetters -- but has grown out of that movement into a nice amalgamation with the church growth movement, the multi-site church movement, and -- oddly enough -- some of the traits and strategies of the traveling revivalists of the 50s, 60s, and 70s.
I am intimately familiar with an attractional church mindset, having both worked on staff and served as a layman at attractional churches, and having been an ardent student and apologist of the seeker church movement for over a decade. (Torn between two lovers, I even once canceled my subscription to Modern Reformation magazine because I thought they picked on seeker churches too much.) I'm not an expert on the attractional model, and I am for all intents and purposes a (hopefully respectful) critic of the model now, but I do believe I know some things about this way to do and be church. If I had to bottom-line the "attractional church," I would say its primary aim is to get as many people through the doors of the church as possible so that they may hear what it means to have a relationship with Jesus Christ.
Let's be clear: This is a noble aim. It is good-hearted and well-intentioned. The genesis of the seeker/attractional movement addressed a very real problem -- namely, church members were not reaching their unsaved neighbors -- and sought to address it with a very practical solution. They wanted to make the experience of church as comfortable and comprehensible as possible so that those untrained in insider church lingo and unfamiliar with the Bible would see the relevance of Christianity for their own lives. The goal, as my fellow thinkers and I used to say, was to remove every stumbling block but the cross from between the lost and Jesus.
The problem has been that, in their zeal to remove unnecessary barriers (ditching hymns with outdated language, losing churchy architecture and mannerisms, etc.), the cross has gradually been relegated to the place of crouching Jack within the ticking box of the attractional movement. And sometimes Jack never pops up.
The gospel has virtually disappeared from the way the attractional church conducts its worship service, the very place designed to communicate God's message to the lost and seeking. Instead, the music is often prepared primarily to show the talents of church artists or to demonstrate that the church is familiar with the latest songs in pop culture, and the messages are often designed to demonstrate that the Bible is relevant to an individual's work life or family life or sex life or what-have-you. Which of course it is.
But the primary problem -- as I see it -- is that when the primary way of seeing the Bible is as a manual for life instructions, it inadvertently affirms and sustains moralism and behaviorism, two "isms" that do not save anybody. This sort of teaching, over time, communicates to both seeker and churched person that: a) Christianity is about you, and b) Christianity is about self-improvement or life enhancement. When, if you care to look at the whole cross thing, the call is unabashed and clarion: Christianity is about dying.
The dominant message in attractional preaching is that Jesus has come to make life easier or better for you, that his teachings can help you in your pursuit of your aspirations. The hope is that buying into this attractive message will make one more comfortable with the real message of Jesus, which is that we must repent of our aspirations and embrace his. And this means admitting something is wrong with us (sin). This is something even many churches today have trouble communicating to people. Because, of course, it is not very "attractive." Sin is re-cast as problems, baggage, issues, troubling life decisions, but infrequently what at its root it really is -- a cancer deep inside all of us that is a hideous offense against the holiness of God.
Right now I am not speaking the attractional churchman's language at all. I know because I've been there. Right now the attractional churchman is taking issue with my claims, saying the gospel is the ever-present reason behind everything they do and that its exactly "church lingo" like this that turns lost people off. He believes he and his church will have a far greater impact for the kingdom than the old-school gospelist church ever will. Because he can reach more people.
There's a problem with that too. Whatever you think of the means and methods of the stereotypical attractional church, the proof is in the pudding, right? These churches are growing and succeeding, right? Well . . .
My own hunch is that we sense the big attractional churches are doing extremely well and reaching lots of people because all we ever hear about are the big attractional churches. They are the ones in the news, and their pastors are the ones getting the book deals and appearing in magazines and speaking at conferences. Appearances can be deceiving, though.
In the mid-90s Sally Morgenthaler published a book called Worship Evangelism that articulated and pioneered the blueprint for seeker/attractional church worship. Morgenthaler became an in demand speaker and writer, and the principles she defended so well became the standard defenses for attractional churches, even ones who'd never heard of Morgenthaler and her book. But Morgenthaler has recently disavowed her work. She has discovered that the seeker model doesn't work. It has not done what it set out to do. And she has the data to prove it.
Morgenthaler's data is consistent with other recent studies as well. Another recent Pew Forum study indicates that America is becoming less and less churched. And the seeker church icon itself, Willow Creek, has recently revealed in REVEAL that much of what they thought they were doing to cultivate disciples hasn't worked.
It turns out that while megachurches are flourishing, America has suffered an actual net loss of churchgoers since the rise of the seeker/attractional movement. This means that the seeker/attractional movement has not succeeded. It meant to get lost persons in the doors and make them "fully devoted followers of Christ," and in the 15 years or so their model's predominance, American churches are actually less full across the board.
So who's filling these churches? As the research shows, other Christians. What generally happens is that an aspiring megachurch develops an attractional mindset, and their efforts produce great fruit in attracting Christians from other churches. I could go off on a rant about consumerism in the American church at this point, but I won't. Suffice it to say, if you keep following the data, you see that this transfer growth is ever in motion. A Christian bored or unsatisfied with the goods and services at his church goes to the more attractive church with the more rockin' worship, more dynamic preacher, more fancy facility, better coffee, bigger kids' or students' ministry, etc., but five to six years later (and in many cases, even less), they are bored of that show and are ready to go find another.
Not all aspects or qualities of an attractional approach to ministry are bad or discountable, but as more and more churchgoers weary of the attractional model and come to question the biblical viability of the way it is typically implemented, more and more are becoming attracted to other alternatives. Traditional services are fairly popular right now. But for those who aren't interested in merely switching worship styles or aesthetically mixing things up, there is the great hope of the missional church.
Thursday I'll begin elaborating on some key contrasts between the missional way of being the church and the attractional way of the model currently prevailing in American evangelicalism.
Jared Wilson is the pastor and co-founder of Element, a missional Christian community in
Nashville, Tennessee, and an award-winning writer whose articles, essays, and
short stories have appeared in numerous publications.
Jared's first book, The Unvarnished Jesus, releases Fall 2009 from Kregel.
A graduate of Middle Tennessee State University, he lives outside
Nashville with his wife and two daughters.
Encounter Jared's passion for the ongoing reformation of the evangelical church
almost daily at www.gospeldrivenchurch.com.
Wonderfully inspiring article. I am a member of the Larado Missionary Baptist Church and I thought I knew what the word 'missionary' meant, but your article has given new meaning to that and much more. I enjoy your articles immensley.
i believe God is within me, and wherever I go, He goes.
i have a very close relationship with the God of my understanding. i may still be going to church if i didn't find each one i went to full of hypocrisy, and with their hands out for money i need to feed my own family.
I gave up on church once too, after serving under abusive pastors. And I have been disillusioned by church experiences since then too.
But I haven't given up, labeling churches as hypocrites or greedy or what-have-you, mainly because I realize that to do so is to declare that I'm better than they are. Submitting to the yoke of Christian community is one of the ways I acknowledge that I am not perfect and that I can love other imperfect people by giving them grace . . . and asking for grace from them to cover my sins too.
There are good churches out there but none perfect.
Hi Jared, I am so glad you are here on SW, God has blessed you with the ability to communicate practical truths and explaining how reaching the lost should never be at the expense of the Gospel. We each have a different gift and God uses it to share his truths, thank you for your faithfulness to use yours. May God be glorifed and may each believer who reads this be inspired to grow in the understanding of our Lord Jesus Christ through His word. God Bless and I am so happy to see you this series on the front page. And perhaps those who have been wounded by church will give fellowship another chance.
After all, there are no perfect people so there is no perfect church, but there are strong churches out there. If I am ever in your area, I will be sure to visit.
Teresa, thanks so much! I'm glad I'm here too. And I'm thankful for the warm welcome and encouragement from you and other participants in the SearchWarp community.
» left by Rich Shipe from Virginia (124 days 9 hours ago.)
Jared,
I like the word "attractional." Is that your term? I like it because it covers all brands of churches that pursue putting bodies in the seats without the gospel as the central piece, not just "seeker." For example, the age old debates over worship styles is a debate over two extremes of "attractional" approaches. Both sides want church done their way so that it attracts a certain kind of person. They just want to come and get their warm fuzzies and then go home to watch football. "I want hymns" "I want this kind of children's program" "I want electric guitar that blows the roof off" "I want this kind of youth group" and on and on...
No, "attractional" isn't my term. I don't know who first coined it, but I've lifted it from the ongoing attractional/misisonal conversations going on in many different venues.
I agree with you that it is more apt at describing a broader mentality.
I also think that there are some fine ways to be "attractive." I may touch on some of those sometime. Mark Driscoll discusses a good blend of attractional and missional approaches in his book The Radical Reformission, using Jesus' ministry as a model.
Some thoughts are new to me, but most we have been contemplating. I am one who believes in balance. When you become extreme in any area, you often will become blind to any other way of relating to people. I think if we really become serious before God and set aside tradition, many answers are obvious. If he puts an opportunity in front of you, don't side step it. We have become too comfortable in how we do church. Attraction often only looks good on the outside and is like a drug; you always need more for your high.
Hope these late night ramblings make sense. Good articles - keep them coming.
Disclaimer: All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional
or organization.
