I’ve been in church nearly every Sunday of my life. I was taken there as a baby and I attended the morning my baby was born, squirming during every contraction. Church attendance is just part of who I am.
Six months ago I left the local church which I’d faithfully attended for several years. Why I left is not the topic of this post. What I want to talk about is the thinking I went through to find a new church. I’ve now found a new church and have decided that, at least for now, that church is going to be my local church which I will support and become involved in.
First, a little background. I live in the southern half of the United States, in the Bible belt. In fact, I live in the Buckle of the Bible belt—there is a huge number of churches nearby in a variety of denominations, sizes, styles, color. Therefore, I had a lot of choices. The other thing I want to mention about my search for a church is that I wasn’t doing this alone. Quite probably the place I ended up would have been different if I had been church shopping only for my own needs and desires.
For me, there were Big Things, Medium-sized Things, and Little things that I considered while looking for a new local church. My list likely wouldn’t be the same as your list. Some things on my list aren’t very “spiritual,” I admit that. I’m just honestly telling what was important to me.
The Big Things
- Are they actually Christians? And is the church not so liberal as to deny the veracity of the Bible and the basic core Christian beliefs? I can tolerate a variety of doctrines. I feel quite free to worship and fellowship with believers with whom I don’t actually agree on all doctrinal points. I allow a generous amount of latitude in both Christian belief and practice. On the other hand, I really do believe the playing field does have real boundaries, and I won’t attend a church outside of the line.
- The place of scripture. I know that not all Christians interpret all scripture passages the same, but if a church uses anything but the message of scripture as its starting point, then what is the point?
- Location. This was a big one for me for some very specific personal reasons. For me, the church needed to be less than 10 miles away, and preferably less than 5 miles away. Due to my location, there were many choices within 5 miles.
- Does it work for my family? Because I’m not in this alone, I had to take the considerations of others into account. If I had an infant, I’d be very sure that my church had a decent and safe nursery. If I had school aged children, I’d be sure that my church had decent Sunday School and children’s education. If my husband were deaf, I’d be sure the church offered hearing aids. Etc. In other words, it isn’t just about me. I needed to take careful consideration of those I’m connected to.
The Middle-Sized Things
- Style of music. Churches have fits over music styles. Churches have two services to accommodate contemporary vs. traditional church music. Or they split over the issue. In my case, music style was a factor, but not a huge factor. It turns out that the church we’ve settled on uses a mix of contemporary and traditional music, but done only with piano, no guitars or drums (both of which are fine with me).
- Quality of music. I have to confess that this became more important to me as we visited different places. I found myself distracted and annoyed with mediocre musicians leading the corporate singing. I know not every church has the native talent to be of top quality. Even so, I personally found less than excellent musical quality to be a big downer.
- Programs that I want/need/am interested in. Not every church can be everything to every person. Churches do tend to specialize in the programs they choose to offer, and for good reason. For instance, one church may have lots of young families and they specialize in Christian education. Another church may be located in an economically depressed area and they may specialize in a soup kitchen and after-school programs. At the risk of sounding too much like a consumer, I personally see no problem with shopping for a church that has programs that fit the needs of me and my family as long as the Big Things come first.
- Quality of the preaching. I’m of the opinion that if a preacher is well-prepared, his or her preaching will not put me to sleep. I may or may not agree entirely with what is being said, but I can tell if a preacher has done their homework. (Preaching from the seat of one’s pants is not the same thing as spirit-filled preaching.) Also, a preacher’s education is important to me. I can hear the word of the Lord from a child or an uneducated bum, no doubt—but I want to be in a church where the pastor’s level of education is at least the same as mine, preferably higher.
The Little Things
- The building. For many, this would be entirely a non-issue. For me, I wanted a church with windows and a ceiling that didn’t give me claustrophobia. I appreciate religious art and religious symbols, too.
- Size. Does size matter? Size certainly makes a difference as far as what programs are offered, and it might make a difference as to the quality of the music. But mainly, size has to do with how much one wants to be visible—it is hard to hide in a small church, but quite easy to hide in a big one. I think size is pretty much a personal preference, but choosing a small church might combat a natural tendency to hang on the fringes.
- Racial mix. I admire churches that can pull off a mix of ethnic groups. The church I attended before did fairly well with this, but the church I’ve recently chosen doesn’t do so well. I hope they improve.
- Age mix. Some churches can pull off being multigenerational and actually offer meaningful programs for all ages. I don’t think most small churches can do this. And any church which keeps the age 18-34 (esp. unmarried or childless) demographic strong, must have something going for it.
- Denomination. For many people, this item would be a Big Thing. For me, it isn’t. I truly wish the Body of Christ were not splintered into denominations, but it certainly is. I’ve happily worshiped (and worked) with believers of many denominational stripes. I feel little need to declare myself a member of any denomination. In fact, I haven’t been a full church member of any denomination ever, in spite of faithfully attending and being involved with many. My reasoning is that I would find becoming a full member to be intellectually dishonest. To me, church membership means I agreed wholeheartedly with everything the denomination stands for; so far, I’ve not found a denomination in that category. Because of that, I’ve opted for associate membership or just no membership, in spite of being fully involved.
Some of you might say, “Well, what about the people and the fellowship?” My reply: that takes a little time. I wouldn’t be able to choose a church based on people and fellowship because those things aren’t evident until I’ve been there a while and some time has passed.
I fixed the misspelling in the title. Is it possible to fix the misspelling in the URL? Or are we stuck with it for all eternity?
Fixed as well, except for Jew’s computer. He’s stuck with the misspelling for all eternity.
Thanks. That makes me happy.
This is an issue my husband & I have been really struggling with recently - now that he finally has regular Sundays off & we can focus on finding a church home. Unfortunately, our choices are much more severely limited as we aren’t so fortunate to be in the Bible belt…
We’ve been debating a lot over the “what you can do for your church, rather than what it can do for you” question. Our choices are between huge churches where we’d be lost in the crowd, or churches that seem to be hanging onto life when even their denomination has given up on them.
The most important question once the doctrinal questions are answered is to ask how can I serve in the community of believers… some big churches are really good at breaking down into smaller communities of fellowship and making it seem like a smaller church. A good church should expect the members to take ownership and responsibility for the health of the group and be a cross-centered, evangelistic, outward-looking body.
Samwise, I think if I were in your situation, a big or maybe even biggest consideration would be my children. Does a potential church provide an environment of Christian education that I approve of? My husband and I became Children’s Church teachers in one small church we attended when our kids were young because we knew we could fill a gaping hole. It was good for our kids and good for the other kids in the church too.
Samwise, I think if we lived back in Oregon, we also would struggle to find a church. Oregon is the least-churched state in the country, and many of those churches are theologically bankrupt. Of those that are doctrinally sound and bible-teaching/believing, many are still afraid of what I might call “heavy church” - that is disciplined, structured, theologically consistent, fellowship-oriented and confrontational towards sin. This does not work well in a state whose population tends to be either ex/current hippies and liberals or, on the other end of the spectrum, leave-me-alone anti-authoritarians who just want to show up to church and barbecue.
Suffice it to say, we are TREMENDOUSLY grateful to God for placing us where he has right now.
The biggest question in choosing a church should always be Thainamu’s “Are they Christians”. Being a “Christian” is about how they view the core of the gospel. We are saved by acknowledging our sin and accepting Christ’s sacrifice. Any church that wavers on this point should be viewed with concern. If you are in an area where there are many churches that cling to this like Thainamu, you can begin to look at other factors. In an area where churches are more sparse, you should find such a church to be part of if at all possible.
As a parent or head of household, your next requirement has to be the needs of your family. When I chose my current church, I was a single man who was looking almost exclusively for a Christian church where I could contribute. Now, I sometimes regret by decision for the lack of spiritual support it has given to my wife. Only recently has she reached a point where she can really begin to pitch in and address this church’s problems with me, and I think her ministry could have been far stronger earlier had we gone to a more supportive church. A husband’s primary ministry before God is to his wife and children, and all other ministry goals MUST come second to their needs. (Paul gives this as a reason he prefers not to marry.)
Only after these two have been addressed can other considerations be legitimately considered. Whether you need a church where you can minister or where they can minister to you depends on your existing ministries and spiritual state. In all but the worst cases, you should expect to do some of both. If God is calling you to primarily minister though, you need to find a church with the needs God has put on your heart. Sitting in the back of a large church and not participating is only marginally better than sitting in front of the radio and not physically attending church.
There may be short times in one’s life when they are too damaged or exhausted to serve, but these should be short periods of recovery. This doesn’t mean you have to sign up for your church’s kids program, but does mean that there should be people in your life who you serve. My wife is currently spending a lot of time with a neighbor girl (and her family) who is planning to visit our church soon. Ministry comes in many forms. If you need “encouragement” from a local church to be more active though, find one that provides this encouragement.
When we shop for services we want done for us, this isn’t necessarily selfish. Such edification of the body should grow us to be able to serve God better. If we want it just for our own enjoyment, that becomes a problem, but so long as the purpose is to draw us closer to God and allow us to better serve others it is a laudable thing to seek personal enrichment.
In the end, any church of believers SHOULD be able to edify you. The church may be lukewarm and stagnant, but the ARE family and you CAN benefit from spending time with them. You may have to stir them to life a little, but if they are in fact believers they are still family.
Darius said, “The most important question once the doctrinal questions are answered is to ask how can I serve in the community of believers…”
This is an interesting question for my husband, who I think is best described as a scholar. How does a scholar serve? I suppose the obvious answer is teaching, but often “normal” people in churches find him somehow threatening. So instead of teaching he has either sung in the choir or worked in the nursery during the preaching hour–there always seems to be a need there (and he’s good with kids, so that seems to work well).
Now that we’ve found a new church, I guess we’ll take a bit of time to see where the needs are and see where we can help.
I’d suggest having him educate the teaching staff and serve as a resource to them. Most pastors have had SOME training in original languages, but nothing like what your husband can offer them. The average attender would have a really hard time understanding much of what your husband could teach, but I’ve always thought it would be nice if all teachers of Bible studies for adults had SOME original language training. It would be nice for anyone doing a word study of any kind to be able to at least consult with an original language expert.
Note regarding the above, I’d understand if he was weary from using his original language skill set professionally and felt called to serve in other ways in the local community too.
From what I’ve experienced, most pastors don’t want that kind of help from a ‘layman.’ I’ve been grateful in that I’ve been in a church (just one in my short life) where the pastor wanted help in digesting thoughts and theories. Like Thainamu said, they feel threatened when someone shows up with a lot more training in an area that they are supposed to be well-versed in. I have seen people kicked out of churches for far less.
Atanamis said, “I’d understand if he was weary from using his original language skill set professionally”
Just for clarification, he does have an undergrad degree in classics when he studied Koine as well as ancient Greek, but his Ph.D. is a double major of linguistics and CS. So I don’t think the problem is one of original languages so much as it is critical thinking in general. But like chrisr said, it is a blessing to be able to be in a church where the leadership is not threatened by and even welcomes highly educated people.
(This week he is giving a series of lectures on the topic of faith and scholarship (to colleagues, at a workshop). That’s the sort of thing that might also work at a Christian college, or some place like that.)
Yeah, I tend to offer my thoughts regardless of whether they are wanted, but understand this is neither right nor useful much of the time.
I know when I teach I’d love to have more knowledgeable people to bounce ideas off of, and fairly regularly I’ll chat with our youth pastor (who is currently in seminary and therefore has a log of Greek fresh in his mind) about word meanings. It is more to be expected since I’m teaching Jr High which is under his formal purview, but discussing sermon topics with a legitimate Bible scholar who attends your church would seem like a no-brainer for any pastor.
To my knowledge, very few pastors have doctorates in ANY subject, and if a member of the congregation is an actual Bible translator it seems ridiculous to pass on any help they’d be willing to give. I may believe a linguist to be wrong in their doctrine, but they should definitely be able to shed new light on what the original intent of the authors was. I trust nothing but the Bible as truly authoritative (so even experts can be wrong), but it seems ridiculous that someone would not want to avail themselves of an expert even if in the end they still disagree.
Thanks for your thoughts, I’ve also thought a lot about what is important in a church. For me, there is a pretty “big” thing that hardly anybody talks about, so maybe I’m unusual in the fact that it matters much. I’d call it “philosophy of ministry,” but that is kind of broad. To be more specific, what’s important to me is a church where relationships–with God as well as with other people–have priority over programs. I feel like a lot of churches have programs that keep people busy doing activities, but I wonder what the impact is as far as changed lives. It’s when our relationship with God deepens and our interactions with other people are “real” enough to have an impact that the true business of the church is happening. Of course, that is hard to measure, and like you said, it takes time to develop relationships. But the church leadership can either encourage and model it, or run roughshod over it. If I were looking for my “ideal” church, I’d be looking for a place where the leadership realized that their job isn’t to just keep programs running, however well attended or “successful” they may appear, but to model ministry that both flows out of spiritual relationships and nutures them. And my theory is that this issue is every bit as important as the quality of the preaching.
Music ministry is a good example of this. As much as I value “quality music,” I also want to see music that is rooted in the spiritual dynamic of the body. For instance, when I choose a song to sing as a special solo, is it a reflection and overflow of what God has been doing in my life, or just a song that will sound good and be a hit with the congregation? Fortunately, I haven’t had to sacrifice musical quality too much to find this. My current worship leader, while he doesn’t actively encourage this as much as one might like, does at least understand it and practice it himself to some degree. Same with the pastor.
Hi Sharon, thanks for stopping by.
I agree, in principle, with your take on programs vs. relationships. I’ve been in a dying church where it was so hard for them to cut the programs even though there were hardly any people left to attend them. Old habits and denominational expectations die hard.
One good thing about standard programs is that they may be a low threshold for new people to step over to become involved. Or, in the case of programs for children, they do produce long term benefits even though it might not seem like it at the time. Still, I think it would be good for churches to take stock from time to time to make sure that the program is still meeting the needs of the church–making sure that the tail is not wagging the dog.
In line with your relationships comment, you might find the previous set of posts about fellowship that were written by Colin to be very interesting. Colin has recently started attending a new church where fellowship on a deep level is what the church specializes in.