What does your church look like?
Jan 29th, 2009 by ljkim
Those of you who know me might know that I actually like the idea of wearing a robe for church (but no one will let me!). In English universities all the students wore robes (and still do in some places) during exams. The idea is that you don’t see the person or the clothes, so that they can be graded only on the content of their thinking. Traditional ministers wear robes for the same reason, the robe is saying “don’t look at me, this is not about me, but hear what I’m saying.”
Now we live in a different time and culture, and the props of traditional European churches have different meanings for us. So take a look at this picture above…What’s interesting is that most people reading this blog think it’s a “church” building. It’s actually a courthouse in Virginia.
Take a look at this second picture:
You probably guessed it… It looks like traditional minister-dress but I got this from a government website on “appropriate dress for judges in England.”
Hmm…I wonder why non-believers feel judged by church. I wonder where they get that idea! Unfortunately the suits and ties of more contemporary churches aren’t too different from American courthouses, bureaucrats, lawyers, politicians, sales people, etc…
Is the pic above a politician or a professor or a pastor? You tell me. (Hint: his name is D.A. Carson).
Now hipper contemporary churches have their own “traditions…” They either look like lecture halls, conferences, or concerts. This picture is of a popular conference/self-improvement type speaker…Tony Robbins at one of his conferences (not church, not Christian, but I like him even though he can be hokey).
Now there’s nothing wrong with church meetings looking like something else. You’re always going to look like something…right? But as long as we look like something else, what SHOULD it look like?
We haven’t figured that out yet, and I think every group needs to figure out what fits for them (I think robes fit just fine in 18th century England). I like it when church meetings are like lecture halls, but many people don’t like school…you might as well be in a courthouse. The concert style is nice too, but it tends to breed church leaders who think like rock stars… and that gets annoying after a while.
In the Bible church meetings, worship meetings, looked like dinner parties. They called them “feasts”; think Thanksgiving dinner…only it didn’t center on food, it centered on God’s love, loving one another, and Jesus’ teaching. Everyone that came was a dear friend or family member. So whatever we do, whatever our meeting space winds up looking like…let’s shoot for something along those lines.
Related posts:
If we look at the early church in Acts, it seems it was more family-like, unlike what most people tend to think “church services”. But, do you think that was the case because it was still a “new” faith and the number of believers were smaller, or, is that what God intended? So my question is, is it because of circumstances or was it purposefully hosted that way?
Hey David,
Hmm good question, was the informality intentional? That’s open to interpretation. But here’s what we know: (a) They had formal ceremonies in ancient times…more than we do today. (b) And there are plenty of formal ceremonies in the OT, and the early church kept them… So do we btw…”Easter” is the English word for Passover”. (c) But the weekly church meetings were different from these. So they still had ceremonial occasions, but it wasn’t what they normally did when they got together.
So was the difference intentional? I think so.
And the churches weren’t small either. The first church in Jerusalem had over 3000 people (they met on the Temple grounds).