Some megachurches closing on Christmas
December 8, 2005
Megachurches are closing on Christmas (Mark’s blog entry here; CNN article here). A few of the churches that will not be holding Christmas morning services are Willow Creek and North Point. My favorite quote is below:
Cally Parkinson, a spokeswoman for Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Illinois, said church leaders decided that organizing services on a Christmas Sunday would not be the most effective use of staff and volunteer resources.
Huh. Not to bag on megachurches (although, maybe we could get Andy Stanley back on this blog to explain how his church came to this decision), but…since when did scheduling our worship of God become contingent on whether or not it was an “effective use of staff and volunteer resources.” Very interesting…
Tags: Christmas, Megachurches
Posted in Ministry
Adam Walker Cleaveland: 
December 8th, 2005 at 5:39 pm
Since when did Pomomusings get so intolerant of religious practices? Were this a decision of Emergent — say, not to meet in buildings or on Sunday — you’d be applauding the decisions as culturally relevant or at least permissable. What gives?
December 8th, 2005 at 5:45 pm
Intolerant of religious practices? -kp-, I wouldn’t say that I’m being intolerant. I just think it’s more funny than anything else that the huge Evangelical megachurches will be the ones empty on Christmas because they are closed, and it’s the mainline churches that will be packed.
What gives is the right question? What gives that churches are closing on Christmas…that’s all I want to know — and I’d love it if Andy would help us see how they came to that decision.
December 8th, 2005 at 6:38 pm
I don’t really see eye to eye with the logic of the Willow Creek spokeswoman in the CNN article who justified shutting down operations because the unchurched wouldn’t attend. First off…there’s just something unsettling about that rationale. Secondly, I know a number of people who ONLY attend two services of the year - Christmas and Easter.
December 8th, 2005 at 6:45 pm
Nick, and that’s part of why I think it’s troubling too. Many people often criticize those who only attend church on Christmas and Easter. But…I want to say, they’re still attending. There has still been enough of a connection in their lives that they, for whatever reason, find some meaning in that ritual of attending church, of finding something spiritual, of connecting with something (someone?) beyond themselves on those days of the year.
That’s why I think it’s important for mainline churches to remain open…
On the flip side, the Christmas season is an INTENSELY busy time of the year for churches - with pageants, and Christmas musicals, candlelight services and everything else. I can see how tempting it would be for churches to just give their staff a break, and for them to view it as possibly an ineffective use of the time and resources. I think I’d still disagree, but…I could see how it could be tempting…
December 8th, 2005 at 6:52 pm
All of this “no church on Christmas” stuff is a lot of silly controversy. I think we should just leave it alone.
December 8th, 2005 at 6:58 pm
“…would not be the most effective use of staff and volunteer resources.”
What’s so “interesting” about this? Isn’t it standard procedure for a given church community to determine how that church community might use its own resources to serve its own members? I mean, some of these communities obviously feel that it would be best to spend Christmas day at home, rather than in the church. Is this really such a big deal?
(Your most recent comment, Adam, reflects an ear toward this position.)
December 8th, 2005 at 6:59 pm
To clarify, I meant “Adam C.,” but it appears that Adam M. agrees with me.
December 8th, 2005 at 8:16 pm
SWEEEEEET - a catfight!
it’s not big deal. and funny (the quote it is) - btw, we’re not having christmas eve services either (maybe i’ll get flamed for not capitalizing ‘christmas’!)…
December 8th, 2005 at 8:19 pm
gee whiz - can i not type? i meant we’re not having services on christmas day. learn to type, jason! remember, church doesn’t always have to happen on sundays…….
December 8th, 2005 at 10:41 pm
i don’t know… Doesn’t there seem to be something wrong with a Christian church not doing at least something on Christmas day? I know that Christmas is not as central to the Christian faith as Easter or even Epiphany… but I mean, come on! If Jesus wasn’t born then none of that would have happened, right? To say that to hold a worship service on the day we celebrate God becoming incarnate among us through the birth of a child “…would not be the most effective use of staff and volunteer resources,” seems to be a tad bit ludicrous to me. But that’s just my opinion, and I suppose that’s why I’m a steadfast member of a mainline, liturgical denomination.
December 8th, 2005 at 10:45 pm
Can’t speak for any megachurches, but…
At our (”large for east coast ELCA congregations”) church, we’re not having Christmas Day worship either. Fact of the matter is, whenever this church has had them, they’ve never had anyone come who wasn’t there the night before (in all the settings I’ve been in, “Christmas and Easter” refers to Christmas Eve) with one family in exception. And attendance numbers would be about 1/10 the numbers of the smallest Christmas Eve service. I feel no compunctions, as a “mainliner,” not having Christmas Day worship. The church wouldn’t be packed. That has been my experience across multiple Lutheran congregations, and it is shared by colleagues of mine with decades of experience.
Do I feel lousy about not having worship on a Sunday? Yeah. But I also know that given my congregation’s gross understaffing, it just isn’t going to happen this year. If anyone in my congregation complains to me about it, my response will be, “Well, in 7 years this situation will come up again. Maybe by then we’ll have at least 2/3 of the staff we need, rather than less than half, which is where we are now. If so, then we have a shot at having Christmas Day worship that Sunday.”
Peace!
December 8th, 2005 at 11:16 pm
seems like a lot of people are bashing the big kids on the block.
didn’t hear much criticism last year when Christmas wasn’t a Sunday and they don’t have services. probably won’t hear much next year when it isn’t a Sunday and they don’t have services.
makes me wonder if these critics are fundamentalists in disguise, hung up on the importance of “worship gatherings” on Sundays?
December 9th, 2005 at 12:27 am
Hi, my name is Kim. I’m not exactly an insider but I do go to Willow and I thought I’d share my opinion.
It’s unfortunate that Cally Parkinson’s comments come off so mercenary because I don’t think they accurately reflect the thinking behind the decision. At Willow we never have church on Christmas, preferring to celebrate the incarnation as a church family in the days leading up to Christmas instead. We don’t have “holy days of obligation,” nor do we need a priest present to worship God, so worshipping from our homes is not really a problem. As for whether or not we take Christmas and the oppurtunities it presents to reach the unchurched seriously enough…we are doing 17 Christmas services at four locations between the 20th and 24th, with more than 50,000 people expected to attend. That’s pretty darn serious!
December 9th, 2005 at 12:47 am
I only celebrate jesus christams eve anyway. christmas day i celebrate presents and my stomach. so it makes total sense to me.
December 9th, 2005 at 12:54 am
Here’s what I think is “interesting.” We’re bickering over whether a church (despite its size) should hold services on Christmas Day. The ONLY reason that’s even an issue this year is because Christmas is on a Sunday. I don’t know about you all, but in all my years as a Christian I’ve only been to church on Christmas day a small handful of times - this is all to reiterate what David said above.
It seems to me that the “interesting” thing about Willow, North Point et al not worshipping on Christmas is that they won’t be gathering to worship on a Sunday, which until they decide that Sunday isn’t their regular time for worship (i.e. when they go alt or something) then that’s when they gather as a Christian community to witness to the resurrection of Christ (crucified on Friday, raised on Sunday) - or did we forget that rhythm to the Christian life when we started “worshiping” on pagan holidays like Christmas.
December 9th, 2005 at 7:46 am
I seem to remember something about the sabbath being made for man and not man for the sabbath. I just don’t think it’s such a big deal and I think it makes sense. If evangelicals are supposed to be about evangelism, I don’t think that it is a huge outreach opportunity to invite someone to church on Christmas Day!
December 9th, 2005 at 8:16 am
The Willow Creek quote is funny. That’s how WC people talk–like they’ve all been to the “MBA in a Box” seminar.
Actually the decision shows that they’re thinking about something other than the bottom line. Foregoing the offering from their Sunday services so that volunteers and employees can stay home with their families and celebrate Christmas together? It’s almost radical.
December 9th, 2005 at 9:52 am
“As for whether or not we take Christmas and the oppurtunities it presents to reach the unchurched seriously enough…we are doing 17 Christmas services at four locations between the 20th and 24th, with more than 50,000 people expected to attend. That’s pretty darn serious!”
That is worth repeating…
Also, many churches never have Christmas Day services and focus instead on Christmas Eve celebrations… and many churches recognize that idea of “vigil” services (like Saturday night Mass in a Catholic Church)… and let’s remember that really the new day starts the previous night (Jewish time!) so Willow and others are simply celebrating “erev Christmas”.
I think that this whole thing shows that Willow and other big churches are actually becoming more emergent:
1. Non-legalistic thinking that allows us to think outside the Sunday 10 AM mindset for worship.
2. People over programs… I think the idea of not making your hundreds of volunteers work Christmas day (big church = parking lot attendants, ushers, greeters, musicians, tech guys, children’s ministry, etc etc etc) after doing 17 Christmas services is a sign of sanity and actually getting the right priorities… this isn’t convienence over God but people over programs… I am sure thousands of Creekers will still be worshiping God on Christmas!
3. Focus on being missional…
4. Looking at something beyong the bottom line of money… that is a big Christmas offering to give up…
December 9th, 2005 at 10:09 am
Plus…5…
(or more a clarification of 3)
It allows people to spend time with people outside the church, sipping coffee and egg nog and talking about life, God, Jesus, and everything else in a way that promotes conversation and understanding and love and real community. Invite your neighbors over, have a prayer service (or even communion service) at home with friends and family… powerful stuff!
December 9th, 2005 at 11:31 am
sabbath doesn’t have to be a sunday.
i agree with the funny willow quote that came across wrong. operating a megachurch takes a lot more money than most mainline churchs - would opening it when you know it is going to be a misappropriation of funds conisdered good stewarship? will that money be better spent funding a mission project or helping a poor family have a merry christmas?
December 9th, 2005 at 11:43 am
I used to work at Willow Creek and went to their website when I read your post, Adam.
The month of December they are having a message series…
Where is the church…
when disaster strikes?
in the lives our Latino neighbors?
in AIDS and global poverty?
These sound like they could be titles of postings on your blog.
I spoke with Cally Parkinson this morning and she mentioned that the anticipated 50,000 people for Christmas Eve services has now balooned to an anticipated almost 60,000.
December 9th, 2005 at 11:49 am
Willow has always focused their weekend services on reaching people who do not yet follow Jesus and their mid-week services on providing a place for Christ followers to have worship, teaching, and prayer.
They always have HUGE Christmas Eve services and never have Christmas Day services. It’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but God has worked through these people.
I wish we (who are dreaming new dreams of how the Church can live out the Gospel in a new day) could do more research and try to be more understanding before we throw stones (even well intentioned ones).
They are growing to have a more Christlike heart in meeting people where they are and in caring for the poor. Here are some verses they quote on their website in talking about their Decmeber series.
“Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress.” James 1:27a
“Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God.” Proverbs 14:31
December 9th, 2005 at 2:12 pm
So, I’m imagining there might only be, like, five or six THOUSAND at Willow if they had a service. Or, back in ‘94 or whenever Chrismas was on a Sunday, was it just Bill Hybels and his family and the staff and volunteers? That’d be interesting. I’d imagine a couple of hundred people came at least… it’s hard to go from 20 000 to nothing in a week!
December 9th, 2005 at 2:57 pm
I heard it was about 1,500 people, but I don’t see what difference that makes if the church has made arrangements this year to facilitate worship from the home. If we worship together in the days leading up to Christmas then what’s wrong with worshipping in smaller groups on Christmas day?
December 9th, 2005 at 3:24 pm
Don’t mess with my liturgy! Theology and church dogma is all up for grabs. But don’t touch my liturgy!
December 9th, 2005 at 5:37 pm
It doesn’t bother me that these churches won’t be gathering to worship on Christmas Day. I agree with the point raised by others here that we never gather to worship on Christmas day, no matter what day of the week it is.
What does bother me is the rationale that these churches (and a lot of people commenting here) give. It’s all about numbers. They say they are not gathering because there won’t be enough people. It drives me crazy when I hear Cally Parkinson say that in 1994 “only a small number of people showed up.” Then we try to justify that by blowing our horns about 50,000 showing up the night before? WHO CARES!? Am I the only one who read the verse where Jesus said that thing about 2 or 3 gathering in his name? I don’t care how many people come to your church or don’t come to it. If there is only one other person, the Spirit of God will still be among you! I preached in a church once where 7 people had gathered to worship. It was intimate, personal, and amazing. I’ve been to churches where there were 2 or 3 thousand gathered. In that kind of setting, I have never felt like we were a church…we were just doing church. It can work the other way, too, though. Small churches can be devoid of God’s Spirit, while large churches can be Spirit-filled. Numbers do not matter.
It’s fine if these churches don’t want to gather to worship on Christmas day. But let’s not kid ourselves with the idea that they are doing it because “worship can take place outside the church.” They are doing it for one simple reason: numbers. And our obsession with numbers has become the source of the church’s failure. Churches of 7 are not seen as thriving or “effective,” while churches of 3,000 MUST be filled with the Holy Spirit. If Jesus was still dead, he would be spinning in his grave.
December 9th, 2005 at 5:44 pm
>>>And our obsession with numbers has become the source of the church’s failure.
Esqueeze me, failure to do what?
December 9th, 2005 at 5:51 pm
Patrick–I think you seriously misunderstand–or choose to misunderstand so that you can attribute negative motives to them.
These issue is stewardship of resources–human and otherwise.
Take for example… when I was a youth minister we constantly had to weigh the amount of energy and time that went into programs vs. the amount of energy and time that went into 1-on-1 and small group relationship building.
If we had a room of 50-75 high school kids (in our case) the work of the 4-5 leaders to put on a great event was worth it (in terms of reaching those kids). If we were only getting 15 kids, maybe it made more sense to simply spend time with those kids and do mor einformal things than to put time into an event; i we had 6 kids, it was pretty obvious what the answer was.
You may disagree with the ministry philosophy, but it is rooted not in an obsession with numbers but in faithfulness and stewardship (both of which are forms of worship!). And that is what Willow is doing…
I wish sometimes people could get past their dislike of certain ministries and have some sense of perspective and objectivity — and maybe even charity (or is that asking too much?)
December 10th, 2005 at 12:33 am
David - The failure that I was refering to was the church’s overall failure to be the church in ministry to the world. We get so consumed with ourselves, our own facilities and numbers, that we often fail to answer Christ’s call to be servants to the world. I know that this is not the case in every individual church. There are mainline and non-denom churches that excel in this calling, just as there are both that fall short of this. The failure that I see lies in the church viewing itself as an institution, rather than a people. It’s the church maintaining itself rather than emptying itself out as Christ did.
Ben - First let me say that I am not expressing a dislike of any ministries. I have joined in worship and fellowship with both mainline and non-denom churches. As I said, both can be Spirit-filled, just as both can be devoid of the Spirit. Churches like Willow Creek, Saddleback and Northpoint are proclaiming Jesus Christ as Lord just as my little Presbyterian church in Nebraska is. As Paul said, as long as Christ is proclaimed, who cares about theology, motives, etc. We are all the church, and I am certainly not disliking or criticizing any of my brothers and sisters in Christ. So please do not accuse me (as I felt you did in your first sentence) or generalize me (as I felt you did in your last) expecially when you do not even know me.
Let me better explain the point I was trying to make about numbers. When we say that we are cancelling Christmas day services because NO ONE will show up, what most churches mean is that NOT MANY will show up. What I was saying is that the NOT MANY are just as valuable, worship-able, and important to God as a sanctuary full of people.
I am a pastor of a church, and our Session decided not to have a worship gathering on Christmas day because most people would want to stay home with their families. Many churches around the country probably used the same rationale. Maybe there is someone who doesn’t have family to stay home with. If there are even one or two people who are lonely or hurting or needing to be in fellowship on Sunday morning, then I want to be there with them. So I am holding a prayer gathering that morning, and anyone who wants to come share that time with me is welcome.
I fully understand the stewardship of resources. My only problem with that logic when applied to this situation is, when did worship become a bad use of our resources? I think that worship is one of the best uses of our human resources, and we should be joyfully pouring ourselves out to worship God. Christ’s call is not to reserve ourselves or save ourselves up. Christ’s call is to empty ourselves out for one another, in our lives, our worship, and our mission. Why do we view LESS PEOPLE in worship (or even just a handfull of people) as a waste of resources? God certainly doesn’t. I simply cannot agree with the rationale that it’s just not worth it (our time or our resources) to gather if only a few people are present. This whole thing started out with just a few people, and the Spirit was poured out on them.
I hope that this can be a friendly, Spirit-filled conversation. Some of the previous posts haven’t been. Seriously, though, the church is not going to stand or fall on this one matter. Maybe every church should cancel worship on Christmas day so that we can all go out and help feed people. That’s probably the best use of any of our time and talents.
December 10th, 2005 at 11:56 am
Patrick, I appreciate your sincerity but I still don’t understand your argument. Unless you are reading “where two or three are gathered…” as “where two or three are gathered and at least one is a clergyman…” then I don’t see what your objection is to the members of Willow Creek worshipping from their homes on Christmas Sunday.
I’ll admit that there was something a little unsettling about the frank pragmatism of Cally Parkinson’s statements, but they are just a couple of short sentences in a news article and shouldn’t be read as the end all and be all of Willow Creek’s ministry approach. If you are interested, Bill Hybels and Gene Appel have both spoken about this since the CNN story and you can find out what they said by doing a simple search at google news.
As for the conduct of the members of this discussion…I’ve been following this story since last Saturday and this is the most polite and open-minded discussion I’ve found on any blog. My thanks to Adam for hosting such a rich group discussion!
December 10th, 2005 at 12:18 pm
Adam,
Thanks for the invitation.
To begin with, we have called off church on the Sunday following Christmas since we started the church ten years ago. So we have been guilty of whatever sin you call this for a decade.
Every year I encourage our attenders to attend church somewhere else on that Sunday, or stay home and worship as a family , or gather with people from their small group. The reason we shut everything down on the Sunday following Christmas is to honor our volunteers. It takes several hundred volunteers to make Sunday happen for us. The interesting thing is, we’ve never taken any heat for shutting down on a Sunday. I guess nobody was paying any attention.
When I made the decision to shut things down on Christmas day I was wearing my employer hat. To open on Christmas morning would require a hundred or so people to come to work on Christmas morning. I would never do that.
Now, the readers of this blog are sophisticated enough to know that we are messing with a tradition not a Scriptural command. Nobody knows exactly when Jesus was born. The celebration of his birth began long after everyone who had any first hand information about it was dead. That’s why we don’t know exactly when He was born.
The way I read it, the spirituality of an individual or a group should be judged by their track record in two areas – love for one another and generosity with resources.
Bottom line, I may not be a very good Christian or pastor, but this Christmas season there are several hundred people who think I’m a good boss.
Merry Christmas.
December 10th, 2005 at 2:03 pm
I understand your dilemma Andy and thank you for chiming in on this discussion. The megachurch phenomena really puts this discussion in a whole new light. It’s no longer a single pastor coming to the building to unlock and perhaps tidy up from the night before. So, I wonder if “faithful use” vs. “effective use” would have been a better way to put it?
Nonetheless, with that “faithful” over against “effective” dichotomy in mind, consider this post by Chris Erdman on his blog from earlier this morning…
“It‚Äôs not only megachurches that have elected to close on Christmas Day this year, many congregations wonder if it‚Äôs worth the extra energy given the conflict church-goers may face between family obligations and congregational worship.
It makes me wonder what in the world we’re thinking in the church these days. “Let’s close the church on Christmas Day so people can spend time with their families.” But isn’t church the “first family” in the life of the Christian? What does baptism really mean and how does being baptized into Christ re-prioritize our obligations—even to our families? Didn’t Jesus take a rather affronting position toward the family, giving his disciples a vision for what baptism meant for them (Luke 12.49-53; Luke 8.19-20)? Giving congregations the opportunity to stay home with their families seems to sin against baptism itself and is an affront to the meaning of the Lord’s Day. Further, I wonder what Haggai the prophet might say to this practice, he who challenged church leaders who gave permission for the faithful to “hurry off to their own houses” (Haggai 1.11) and neglect the worship life that was necessary to sustain them in the land.
A woman in our congregation told me her feeling about worship on Christmas Day; frankly, I expected her to grumble. But this teacher and a mother—who could feel justified in staying home, enjoying a day with her family, without having to go out—said: “At last! I can spend Christmas Day the way it ought to be spent—in worship with others and not isolated in my little home.”
Christians who say at home on Christmas Day aren‚Äôt bad, but I do think we who pastor them might be if we give them no other option.”
Again, I understand the megachurch and consequentely the “house” church/worship context, but if we are thinking in terms of faithfulness vs. effectiveness (or perhaps pragmatic) why close the church on Sunday. I would at least hope that you’ve challenged your members who are staying home to think about how they might open their “house fellowships” to those in need - the lonely, the lost, the homeless - rather than use them as an excuse for being with those whom we like and slap some spiritual lingo on them.
So Andy, how would you respond to Chris, another well respected pastor.
P.S. here’s the URL for Chris’ blog in case your interested: http://odyssey.blogs.com/odyssey/
December 10th, 2005 at 4:15 pm
I would tell him I decided not to require my staff to work on Christmas morning.
December 10th, 2005 at 8:09 pm
staff? Hmmm. I actually never thought about that one. Will I need one of those?
You mean that my post-seminary church wont just run on my ability to argue with other over-educated theologians about sublapsarianism and my ability to point out what every other Christian in the world is doing wrong?
Whoa. I didnt know I might actually have to be a leader and make prayerful and strategic decisions that might not please the media and my insatiable critics.
… maybe I better just be a theology teacher.
December 10th, 2005 at 9:42 pm
I think Andy Stanley shifts the concern I had with Closing on Christmas from giving people time with families instead of the Chrisian’s “first family” to giving those who work the day off. That puts it differently than others have put it. I can deeply appreciate his concern and his “gift” to his staff–professional and volunteer at Christmas. There is no question that framed in his terms, taking “Christmas” off can be justified on those terms.
I’m sure staffing a megachurch is an enormous task, but it is no great than any of our smaller churches–only in terms of scale.
Andy’s framing, while understandable, still raises concerns for me about how we all conceive the work we do on Sundays. There’s been too much of putting worship and the things we do to practice of worship in utilitarian terms.
Most of us pastors consider what we do on Sundays “work.” That is a mistake, an understandable mistake, but still a mistake. We pastors, like our people, do not work on Sundays. We are part of the worshipping community, each of us with work (the “Opus Dei”) to do. And we all offer our gifts, whether we’re serving coffee, passing out bulletins, picking up trash in the parking lot before worship, locking up after church, singing in the choirs, teaching Sunday School, collecting the offering, preaching, praying. If a church can’t do these things and consider them part of service to others and to our Lord on the Lord’s Day than I think that church has some rethinking to do. That rethinking is precisely what we’re up in our own congregation. For too long we’ve been enslaved to the totalitarian claims of work that have encroached on the church’s practice. The culture is asking if anyone can show them a way to live differently form the ways most people live/work (see Business Week, Oct. 3, 2005).
The church, as witness to the gospel, ought to avoid framing what we do in business terms. That may be the greatest gift we can give to our people. But it does mean that administrative pastors, like Andy and me as well, must guard against a utilitarian approach to the Lord’s Day, difficult as that may be.
December 11th, 2005 at 1:11 am
everyone gets all impressed when the dude actually shows up to defend himself. oooooh.
seriously though, his explanation makes a lot of sense I think, I just think it is easy to take potshots at the mega churches cause they suck. sorry dude but they do. but…well from some perspective every church sucks. everychurch is doing something that will nto jive with everyone. I would not have made this exact decision because I would not have chosen to be a mega church. I would have split the church long before now. but what do I know? seriously, I am sure the people who love dude’s church would hate one run by me. well actually i know they would because I am so not into the very things people are attracted to in those churches. however, while I can def make theological distinctions and maybe pass judgement on someones ability to see scripture or interpet it theologically, in the end I don’t really KNOW. and maybe tha is the problem here, we all think we know so much and so we just use that sureness of knowledge to bash each other. so I feel like these churches have sold out to the worst parts of our culture. who made me ecclessiastical judge. I will def walk a seperate path, and will prolly take stones hurled at me from the very camp I am trying to make room for right now, but I should be as willing as possible to still make room for them to be, even while I question their practice and theology. surely they will question mine as I start my anarcho-syndacalist commune dedicated to Jesus.
December 11th, 2005 at 5:43 pm
I work at Willow Creek and I have to say I like my boss for deciding not to have a service on Christmas so I can celebrate with my family and recover from the 8 services we are doing in the days before Christmas. My biggest concerened about all the attention this debate is getting was summed up in next weeks Time Magazine:
Christian blogs are full of unseasonably vitriolic postings, full of Scriptural references, theological arguments and appeals to common sense. Evangelicals are attacking other Evangelicals in the media. And the debate within the Evangelical community is giving the rest of America a rare look at the divisions that do exist, usually quietly and below the surface, of the 65-million-strong Evangelical community. It is a reminder that this group, so often labeled the “religious right”, is diverse both in theology and methodology. The church is in fact many churches, this bloc is no monolith, and this argument, says Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, “shows we’re still all very human.”…
Others worry that the fight may be more damaging than any impact from what they’re fighting about. “”The central point is not what hour of what day the congregation gathers corporately to celebrate the birth of Christ,” says Willow Creek’s Hybels, “but rather that in our hearts and lives we allow the coming of Christ to transform us.” On his blog, Louie Marsh, pastor of a small church in rural Arizona, quoted the Apostle Paul from the Book of Romans, who wrote, “Who are you to judge someone else’s servant?” “I do know [that] this isn’t something we should be fighting about,” Marsh blogged. “Let’s just focus on serving God the best we can.”
Amen to that!
December 12th, 2005 at 1:30 am
I’ve scanned the comments here, as well as Erdman’s blog. This recent post by Steph of Willow Creek “sums up” my concern, viz., “serving God the best we can” occurs, and is performed, in context, and in this case,a context of a calendar date marking a significant Christian tradition. But why is the most familiar and routine, the most public and sublime (yes, for better or worse) activity of the church-its worship of the triune God- postponed because of a calendar conflict with the prevailing cultural powers?
I would add, lest I be misunderstood, there some bloggers (and commenters…) whose patience with those congregations not gathering for worship on Dec. 25 appears to be replaced with poison and replusive descriptions of their faith. Please do not count me among those who write such! I would appeal for love, prayer, and gentleness for these brothers and sisters: because that is who they are. Am I disappointed some won’t gather because of submission to the powers? Sure.
Just a guess, but Andy Stanley, Bill Hybels, and other pastors of megachurches would love to gather with their congregation for worship on Dec. 25: only because it’s Sunday, not because of Christmas per se. Furthermore, I have yet to read of one of these pastors (or staff like Steph of Willow Creek) who are even suggesting, “Great! We get to blow off worship on the last Sunday of 2005!
And, let’s not inadvertenly end up telling these pastors and their flocks that on Christmas Day 2005, “No posada.”
December 12th, 2005 at 2:26 pm
The Willow Creek quote was pretty lame, I’ll give you that. But, I go to a church of 250 people and my friend attends one of 500 and neither of our churches are holding services, either… instead they are doing extra Christmas Eve services. I’m not saying one or the other is better, but I don’t think it’s fair to just argue about megachurches when it’s actually many churches of different sizes.
December 13th, 2005 at 1:54 pm
>>But let’s not kid ourselves with the idea that they are doing it because “worship can take place outside the church.” They are doing it for one simple reason: numbers. And our obsession with numbers has become the source of the church’s failure.
December 13th, 2005 at 4:21 pm
By the way, I noticed that Imago Dei and Mars Hill have both cancelled their Sunday service, so it looks like the trend has seeped into the emerging church as well.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:54 am
I don’t know about Imago Dei but where the fat did you see that Mars Hill is closing on Christmas? Quite the contrary, if my eyes don’t deceive me. They have four Christmas Day (that’s Sunday) services. Just one “service” on Christmas Eve. Hmmm…interesting indeed. In fact, if any of you had been following the conversation over on Chris Erdman’s blog (Odyssey) now would be a good time to check it out again. Chris suggests we would do better to cancel Christmas Eve services if we wanted to “give our employees a day off” before we did that on Christmas Day.
So there’s a few more logs for the fire.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:25 am
First they get mad that people are taking the real, or religious, reason for the season out of the season and making sure people say “Merry Christmas” instead of “Happy Holidays” but then when Sunday wonderfully falls on the Lord’s day and they have a great opportunity to emphasize and celebrate that Christmas is a religious holiday FIRST and a cultural one and a family one SECOND then they decide to pass on that opportunity and decide to close their doors. oy vey. I’m confused and not just by my run-on sentence.
December 14th, 2005 at 9:28 am
Jack wrote: “where the fat did you see that Mars Hill is closing on Christmas? Quite the contrary, if my eyes don’t deceive me. They have four Christmas Day (that’s Sunday) services…”
I have a friend on staff at Mars Hill. (We’re talking about the one in Grand Rapids, right?) I asked him if they’re having church on Christmas Sunday. He said No.
I realize those in the emergent conversation are a little flexible with the idea of absolute truth…so maybe he really meant “Yes, we’re having four servies.” Or maybe he misunderstood the question. Or maybe they’re not having church on Christmas Sunday.
December 14th, 2005 at 11:16 am
Sorry Steve - I thought you were referring to Mars Hill in Seattle.
December 14th, 2005 at 12:07 pm
No problem, Jack. Actually, I didn’t know there was a Mars Hill in Seattle, which shows how far out of the loop I am.
December 15th, 2005 at 12:28 pm
I have had some similar concerns about some of the churches closing on Christmas Sunday. While I don’t think that it is a grievous error or sin and I completely understand Andy’s decision as an employers, I do think that it is a miscalculation of non-churched people who do often come to church on Christmas. I wrote this piece and this piece about this miscalculation and have also received some feedback from someone at Willow Creek. I would love to get Andy’s feedback as well.
December 15th, 2005 at 3:52 pm
I’m not Andy, nor do I play him on TV, but I have to say this is one of the silliest controversies I’ve ever seen. My church, like many churches around the country, is doing multiple Christmas Eve services beginning on Dec. 23rd (14 services in 6 locations) All of our staff is required to be here for Christmas Eve services and therefore many of them cannot travel home to be with their families for Christmas. Many of our volunteers make the same sacrifice only because they know that more lost people come to church Christmas Eve than any day but Easter. (We’re open for Easter by the way) We pour everything we have into Christmas Eve services so that we can become all things to all men so that by all means we might save some. And then to be attacked from all sides because we won’t require those same volunteers and staff to come again on Christmas Day to serve the handful of faithful who will show up just because the doors are open is unbelievable.
I honor the churches that are open Christmas Day; I pray they will be blessed for their faithfulness. But when a world full of self-righteous navel gazers attack other Christians for trying to be faithful to what God has called them to do, its more than I can stomach.
December 15th, 2005 at 6:54 pm
Hey Matt,
You mentioned that these churches that are closing on Christmas are the same churches that are upset about the “happy holidays” vs. “merry christmas” debate. I would bet that is not the case. I know that the church that I attend will be closed on Christmas Day, and we have not made a big deal of the Happy Holidays issue. Our goal is to reach people for Christ, and we feel that the best way to do that is to love them where they are…not argue with them over vernacular. Here’s a link to a great blog post about that. http://markwaltz.typepad.com/marks_weblog/2005/12/christmas_or_ho.html
December 15th, 2005 at 7:42 pm
I think there is a deeper “angst” going on in these comments then whether it’s OK to not have church on a Sunday. Surely, we are to live everyday as the Lord’s day. But I think the church in America is wrestling with consumerism and a consumer approach to worship and church. A big church does nto necessarily mean it is fulfilling the Great Commission. It may just mean it is offering comfortable chairs, convenient worship times, entertianing drama and video, a food court, current music styles, and so on and on and on. Does the church transform people by conforming to culture. Maybe. But in the end we aren’t selling a product. We are calling people to follow Jesus Christ and that means sacrifice. Even if it means sacrificing your right to drive 40 miles to a church which has conformed to what you think church should be in order to help transform the church that is right down the street into a church that is proclaiming the gospel in word and deed right in your own neighborhood. The best thing mega churches could do for the Church is to ask people to break up into smaller culture transforming churches within the neighborhoods that they live in.
December 15th, 2005 at 7:55 pm
I should say before my last line, “In my opinion” and not necessarily comletely correct. I do not discount the many benefits that large numbers can afford and do know that many of them are challenging their members that salvation is not a product we own but a lifestyle that we live.(and not just one of personal piety but one of justice, peace, and action) But I am disheartened by people commuting out of their neighborhoods to attend church miles awasy unless that church has a strong parish program.
And Josh, thanks for the link and I must admit I wrote that somewhat “tongue-in-cheek” as I really think there are larger issues to address than when it is ok not to have church on Sunday, like how do we foster a worshipful life in members Monday through Sat? Interesting times.
December 18th, 2005 at 12:26 am
Just chiming in as a pastor who will be doing a service on Christmas Day…
Quick thought experiment: Let’s say you have a church of 20 people. You’re all sitting around talking after a service when you realize that Christmas will be on a Sunday this year. Ten people mention that they’ll be out of town that day. Six more say they’ll likely skip it because of family activities, but they’ll be there for the Christmas Eve service, just like every year. So the remaining four people agree to just worship with everyone else on Christmas Eve & not hold a service on Sunday morning. Would we see anything wrong with that?
Slightly different thought experiment: Let’s say another church of 20 is highly evangelism-oriented. They’re sitting around talking about the same thing & realize that only four of them have friends who would attend a Christmas Day service, but all of them have friends who would attend Christmas Eve (including the ones who would come Christmas Day). Would we see anything wrong with them deciding to just hold their service on Christmas Eve instead of Christmas Day? (Someone would say, “They should do both!” Why, when they all just worshiped together & got their friends there the night before?)
December 19th, 2005 at 2:27 pm
Which is exactly what my own community decided to do. The first thing, anyway. The second really didn’t come up!
What can I say, I’m at war with Christmas.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:06 am
I’m senior pastor of a small congregation (250) in central FL, and we are having Christmas eve services but none Christmas day.
And it was my decision.
And I can honestly say that the “numbers” issue (people or money) never crossed my mind. To me the issue is very simple - worship takes place everywhere for a Christian. Even outside the four walls of our church. And especially with your family on Christmas. I believe it is honoring to God to help build strong families.
As for the “seekers” who may show up (we are “seeker-sensitive”): we have taken special care in publicizing our service times for a month now, with the belief that most “seekers” will come on Saturday, Sunday, or whatever other day we decide to meet as long as we let them know. In short, I don’t believe most non-Christians are outraged by the decision of some churches not to meet on Christmas (although more than a few are laughing at the way some of us bicker about it).
Didn’t mean to get too heavy. Peace to all…
January 10th, 2006 at 2:51 pm
I don’t know the full reasons why NPCC closed on Christmas and New Year’s, but I suspect that it was the staff’s way of being considerate to their volunteers and laymen. That church is big and they have a huge contigent of volunteers, probably close to 1000 if not more to handle the kids, teens, college, 3 services, AV guys, stage guys, ushers, cleaners, etc…
Honestly, coming from a church that has over a 1200 people to our services, I would have liked it if the volunteers were given a day off on those days! It’s for God’s service of course, but I would find it hard to look at a volunteer’s eyes and ask them to forgo spending Christmas morning with my kids to help set up the lights and sound for the stage.
Those are my two cents.
May 30th, 2006 at 2:19 pm
Did jesus go to church on Christams?
August 13th, 2006 at 10:48 pm
You are pretty arrogant aren’t you? Why don’t you spend your time doing something worthwhile instead of bashing people. What makes you think you are so much better than people like Andy Stanley or Bill Hybels. I don’t see you leading hundreds of people to Christ. Until then why don’t you keep your “amazing insights” to yourself :)
August 18th, 2006 at 6:50 pm
On those days Christians can send their blessings via the internet at http://www.onlineblessings.com.