Personal Preference and Churches
Planting churches forces us to consider some issues we might not otherwise dwell on. For example, how much of what we look for in a church is truly biblical and how much is just personal preference, and how much personal preference is acceptable? After all, every church isn’t for everyone, so isn’t it fine for us to just admit that, on some level, we make these choices based on preference?
If you’ve been involved in “church life” for any extended period of time, you surely know that people are not casual about their preferences. We’ve all heard the horror stories of churches splitting over the color of carpet. Some of you may have actually lived through that. Yet most of us are willing to overlook matters like the color of the carpet, but don’t you dare sing too many “contemporary” songs, or “traditional hymns,” depending on which side of the argument you come from.
One of the things that breaks my heart in this discussion is that, for a good many people, the more theologically informed we become, the more picky we become, when I’ve come to believe it should be exactly the opposite. For many people, the more theology they understand and become convicted of, and as they begin to formulate positions, many of those positions become boundary markers of what their idea of church should be when in reality, there are godly men and women on the other side of that theological conviction who just as strongly believe otherwise. In other words, many of our theological convictions are simply strongly held personal preferences, just (hopefully), with Scriptural backing.
And yet, shouldn’t it be the case that as we become more theologically secure in our own positions that we understand that, for most of them, it truly is believers that we disagree with? As we become convinced of certain positions, should be picture of The Church become bigger instead of smaller. Yes, there are doctrines worth excluding over. If you don’t believe in the Trinity, you are not a Christian. If you believe baptism saves you, etc. But let’s be honest, for most of us, these are not the kinds of issues we are leaving or joining churches over.
Don’t get me wrong. I love to study theology as much as the next guy, but I worry that we are all so convinced that we are right that, soon, everyone else is wrong. All of the sudden, I’m no longer free to worship with brothers and sisters with differing opinions because its my duty to show them the error of their theological ways. Many of our theological convictions, as important as they are (and we should all have them), become dividing walls rather than tapestry threads. What I mean is that we take many theological convictions which are not essential, either to the faith or the church, and we use them to exclude people who are most likely believers while we could be coming together over the essentials, weaving together these various positions. The result is that the church often resembles a maze more than it does a beautifully woven tapestry.
I’m not saying we should be B’hai or Unitarian and that every believe is fine and dandy and that they’re all equal or part of the same belief. But should our view of the end-times really be used to exclude others (please note, I view the “Dispensationalism vs. Covenantal” discussion as being about much more than just the end-times and even then I worry we divide more than necessary)? Can we really not worship if a song was written after a particular year? Am I naïve to think that we truly can have unity in what is essential, liberty in what is non-essential and in all things charity? When is being “picky” no longer just being theologically careful but prideful? If the Gospel is faithfully and accurately being preached, if there is biblical polity (church structure; i.e., elders, deacons) and practice (of the sacraments, membership, discipline, etc.), is music style really a deciding factor? I thought we were supposed to consider others better than ourselves (Philippians 2:3-4), not as potential converts for our preferences.
Just in case anyone starts to wonder who I’m writing about, I’m primarily targeting myself and the initial group at Church of the Cross. It’s only natural that a brand new church will take on some of the “preferences” of the planter and the initial members. And its also only natural that some people will visit, wanting to push their own preferences on to a new work. As a planter, I must prayerfully find that place of balance between standing firm for implementing the vision of this local church that God has given me and not pushing my own personal preferences too strongly. I must be comfortable, and even joyful when this new work takes on shades and hues that I had perhaps not initially intentioned, because, after all, it’s not my church but God’s. I am called to be a faithful under-shepherd to the Chief Shepherd (1 Peter 5:1-4). After all, it’s Christ that I’ll have to answer to, especially for pursuing my own preferences. May I be found faithful.
- Read J.L. Dagg’s Manual of Church Order online
- Read Nine Marks of a Healthy Church by Mark Dever
- Read Brothers, We Are Not Professionals by John Piper
- Read The Church by Edmund Clowney
[...] has a great post, "Personal Preference and Churches ." An excerpt: If you’ve been involved in “church life” for any extended period of time, [...]
Interesting thoughts & questions, Brent.
There is, in fact, a church near us that always has this message on their marquis: “WE SING OLD HYMNS.” And usually some kind of sign beside it about how they only use the KJV. I guess they want to weed out any contemporary chorus lovers (& NIV users) before they even hit the door. Needless to say, we’ve never been there. But at least we’d know what to expect if we did go, I suppose.
Wow, Brent! I admire your honesty. I will continue to pray for you as you labor with and for Church of the Cross.
I live in an ecclesiastical wasteland, so I’d put up with a LOT if I could just feed on Christ by faith in the sermon.
I remember a seminary friend pointing out that the “Regulative Principle” that the Reformed find in the Second Commandment is meant to protect us from human inventions, rather than to force us to be “traditional.” In other words, what matters are God’s preferences: and we can find those in Scripture. This is why your statement stood out to me: “After all, every church isn’t for everyone, so isn’t it fine for us to just admit that, on some level, we make these choices based on preference?”
But shouldn’t every church be for everyone? Before denominations and American consumerism, what was a poor soul to do? The only “flavors” were theological, not stylistic. Have “marketing” and “preferences,” so penetrated the Church’s very being, that “there’s no accounting for taste,” in the same vein as fast food chains and other expressions of popular culture?
Over at the Upper-Register blog, Lee Irons is currently challenging me to rethink how my priorities fit together, but it still seems to me that a good Confession defines what is essential and what is not. I know you don’t agree with the Reformed view of the sacraments, but outside of that (and the chapter on civil government/theocracy, which most 16th and 17th century confessions seem to share), I think the Belgic Confession is a wonderful statement around which to unite. It doesn’t say more than what needs to be said. That way the wheel doesn’t have to keep being reinvented.
I have to admit that it is precisely what you are struggling with that makes the Exclusive Psalmody position so attractive (though I don’t hold it), because it takes the traditional/contemporary debate out at the proverbial knees.
My recommended reading:
With Reverence and Awe: Returning to the Basics of Reformed Worship by D.G. Hart and John R. Muether.
All God’s Children and Blue Suede Shoes: Christians and Popular Culture by Kenneth A. Myers.
A Better Way: Rediscovering the Drama of God-Centered Worship by Michael Horton.
Great thoughts Chris, thanks. I particularly like your reference to the Regulative Principle as protective rather than promoting “traditionalism.” I think you’re probably right in that my own comments probably reflect the very idea I’m struggling with. Thank you.
Well said.
The best line:
“One of the things that breaks my heart in this discussion is that, for a good many people, the more theologically informed we become, the more picky we become, when I’ve come to believe it should be exactly the opposite.”
I think you’re putting a finger on an interesting tension, too, this idea between how much of what we pick in a church is personal preference, and how much is ok? How much is realistically finding a place where you feel at home vs. just being cosumeristic?
This is one of my many favorite C.S. Lewis quotes:
“Every service is a structure of acts and words through which we receive a sacrament, or repent, or supplicate, or adore. And it enables us to do these things best…when, through familiarity, we don’t have to think about it. As long as you notice, and have to count, the steps, you are not yet dancing but only learning to dance. A good shoe is a shoe you don’t notice. Good reading becomes possible when you need not consciously think about eyes, or light, or print, or spelling. The perfect church service would be one we were almost unaware of; our attention would have been on God.”
See this link for more from Lewis on this subject: http://topmostapple.blogspot.com/2006/01/c-s-lewis-on-liturgy.html
Amen to this. It is scary when we equate our ability to knit-pick other Christians with being spiritually mature!
As Chris said, “I live in an ecclesiastical wasteland, so I’d put up with a LOT if I could just feed on Christ by faith in the sermon.”
I look for a Christ-centered, cross-focused sermon, and I think it is Biblical to look for this. It is His Divine Service giving the gift of Himself to His children. He pours gracious gifts upon us as we gather as a body. The following link is a simple diagnostic I use to evaluate sermons.
http://eqdj.wordpress.com/2008/07/23/sermon-diagnostics/
Is that a personal preference? I don’t think it is, but don’t mind being challenged on this.
Jake T robbed me of some of my thunder, but …
“One of the things that breaks my heart in this discussion is that, for a good many people, the more theologically informed we become, the more picky we become, when I’ve come to believe it should be exactly the opposite.”
I have read some good slooge (as Brent calls it) on this blog, but that may just be the best ever.
It’s akin to those who best understand and who have most enjoyed God’s grace who are often the least gracious with others.
The terrorists took it in the shorts today, thanks to you, brother!
Yep. That WAS a good quote from Brent Thomas…somebody put on the web somewhere…oh wait, it is! Thanks Brent for realizing that we will answer for the times we chose our own preference over seeking to serve others. Unless we are ready to say that God likes a particular style over another, I think it is wise to stay concerned with the content of what we do in church and the heart with which we approach the worship of God. The minute we elevate a particular style of music or form, we show how small our view of God is. We also show how selfish we are. But isn’t that a repeating lesson for most of us? God is bigger than we realize; we are more selfish than we realize? May God give us more grace to get our eyes back on him instead of these passing forms. The way to elevate what is really important is to refuse to make an issue of what is not. If we all did that, we show we are satisfied in Him…not our music, not our liturgy, not our hand-lifting and clapping. And we know via John Piper that “God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him!” (Sorry, I couldn’t resist going there.)
“I’m not saying we should be B’hai or Unitarian and that every believe is fine and dandy and that they’re all equal or part of the same belief.”
As for the Baha’i Faith, I’d clarify that being a Baha’i does not mean everyone is right. But no religion is self-contained and to the degree we are exclusionist we become blind. The heritage of religious progress continues because God’s will for us continues. If Zoroastrian Magi could find the baby Jesus what will Christians some day find? Yes even Baha’i Writings explicitly mention there will be another Message from God someday.