listening to sunday night safran on the 10th of september, right at the very end of the show they started discussing the paradigm boundaries that should exist.
the example they discussed was in a doctor's surgery you expect traditional western medicine. if you wanted crystals or reiki, there'd be more appropriate places to go.
in the same way, a church should be clear about what their business is. if they are about preaching the word, then they should preach the word. if they are about support groups - surely AA or GA or wherever else, may be more appropriate.
the boundaries around the world are becoming more and more blurred - do we really want to be a one-stop AA-Bible-Cafe-sporting club?
maybe we do...
i'd appreciate your thoughts - do we need to be more careful about our role, but more particularly how that role is perceived?
2 comments:
After reflecting on the weekend at Challenge Conference…
Do you have any additional thoughts on the one-stop-shop type church after the passing comment from Chappo at lunch saying we need to be like the Americans and plant churches next to the Golden Arches?
So if McDonald's invest in research to know where people will congregate then should Christians capitalise on this and plant in nearby location???
It does seem innovative and targeted… yet would this be the one-stop-shop church?
Are we appealing to the world's desire for convenience of spirituality and pleasing the busy transient consumerist climate in which we live?
Would this ‘church’ be serving the world or the Lord?
Church meetings should be clear about what their business is: For our appeal does not spring from error or impurity or any attempt to deceive, but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please man, but to please God who tests our hearts.
thanks hayley
i might write a whole new blog on this!
Post a Comment