Per Audra’s Request
Jun 29
Audra thinks I’m being too mean to Andy Stanley. She’s probably right. Actually, I don’t so much have a problem with Andy Stanley, as I do with the general state of the modern church that thinks that we must all strive to be a “success” as we see his church. It bothers me greatly that this is the picture in our mind of “success,” when that looks very different from what I see the Bible emphasizing when it comes to the important things about church. For example, everyone thinks it’s important to have a great worship band, an attractive children’s ministry, a great facility, etc in order to have a thriving church. It’s like we put the weight on the totally wrong things.
While it’s great to have a strong organization (no one likes a failing organization), etc…is this really where are deepest issues as a church lie? I’ve been part of churches that try to focus on these things, but have seen how quickly and easily we can neglect the more important things such as:
1. is the music appealing to unchurched people vs. does the average person here really understand what worship is really all about and who we are worshipping right now?
2. is the sermon engaging vs. is the sermon flowing from the pastor’s personal communion with Christ and are we truly communicating His salvation and the call of Christ?
3. is every aspect of our service flowing from one element to the other vs. are we actively seeking the presence of Christ with everything within us?
4. are we attracting visitors vs. are people’s lives really being changed by the Gospel like our mission statement says?
5. do people enjoy our worship services vs. are our people abandoning everything in their lives for the sake of Christ?
6. do we have great programs vs. are the people in our congregations living according to God’s Word when they’re not in our building?
…just to name a few. I’m afraid many churches pour their energy/resources into the first part of each question, and just hope that the second part of each question somehow happens as a result of their efforts making the first part of the question perfect. In my opinion, all of our time, energy, resources should go into the second part of each question, because time is short, and it’s people that really matter–not how well our organization is run or how well we produce our worship services. I think these have much less of an effect on people than the weight we church leaders put on them.
So, in this post, I would like to praise Andy Stanley, and also point out some of the common elements that he and I probably share:
1. Andy Stanley is brilliant–and so am I. LOL. Actually, what I mean to say is that I don’t think Andy Stanley is dumb about these things. I think he’s smart enough to agree with the issues I’ve been presenting in this and recent posts. In fact, it was his church that produced that video clip I linked to awhile back, which spoofs so much of today’s contemporary worship. I think Andy Stanley and his church gets it. It’s the other church leaders who drool over his success that I think are missing the boat.
2. Andy Stanley is doing everything he does for the sake of the Gospel. I am totally stoked about this. He believes time is of the essence, and that people’s souls are at stake. He believes that the vast number of unchurched people in his communities MUST come to know Christ as Savior if they are to be saved from eternal hell. It’s what has driven him to make his church focus on reaching the lost. He is baffled by churches and church leaders who don’t sense that urgency. I’m right there with him.
3. Andy Stanley is unafraid to be critical of the American Church. He is ok with people like me disagreeing with him and with others just plain bashing him. He is willing to call out the inconsistencies, complacency, lack of love for the lost that exists in local churches all across the country. He still speaks up and critiques regardless, because he feels it’s important enough to do so. The church MUST reach the lost, and that is more important to him than what people think of him or what kinds of things people say about him or his ministry. My blog posts will not faze him. I think he and I share similar convictions along these lines. It’s more important for the Gospel to be spread and for the Church to be truly effective than to be liked by everyone. Let people say what they want to say, but I refuse to let my life and ministry account for so little as I see around me.
4. From comments I’ve heard by Andy Stanley, I think he and I see denominations very similarly. I’m not a fan of them. While they have some good points about them, I question whether the good outweighs the bad. I’m not ready to make a decision on that quite yet, however.
5. Andy Stanley is not content with doing church as it’s always been done. I couldn’t agree more.
So I think that Andy Stanley and I have more in common than what we might disagree on. When it comes to other church leaders who drool over his success, however, I feel I have very little in common with them. Instead, I want to somehow prove to those leaders that you don’t really need all those trappings to be a success, and to stop pursuing them so emphatically. Instead, I feel we need a revival in the hearts of church leaders to really return to praying, reading Scripture, following the voice of the Holy Spirit, repenting of our pride/selfishness, not caring about how “successful” we are, and abandoning every part our lives for Christ and the Gospel.
Church leaders, if we are successful in building ourselves a megachurch, will Jesus say “well done,” or will He only say so if we hold nothing back in this earthly life, forsaking everything to follow Him? Where are those leaders? I’d rather read books about those who have followed this way of life, rather than read the books of pastors who try to tell me how to become a great administrator of a large church. I would rather talk with Andy Stanley about how he walks with Jesus and what his passions are, rather than find out how he was able to grow his church so large. That feat doesn’t impress me, but I’m sure there’s much more about the man that would if I had the privilege of knowing him.
Audra, what do you think of this post?
I never even knew who Andy Stanley was until you started this blog series, so I just kind of thought he was becoming the scapegoat! I agree with all your major points here. A lot of churches focus on the wrong side of the question.
However, I keep coming back to the bottom line of people getting saved. If a family that doesn’t know Jesus comes to a church because it has a great playground for their kids, and the kids in turn hear about Jesus in Sunday School, or the parents hear about Jesus in worship, or someway or another the whole family becomes believers–well, I’m more than willing to build a playground for that to happen.
Love you.
The one thing about that is that it becomes hard to separate building a playground to reach the lost and building a playground so the church kids can play on it. We may say it is the former, but if we’re being honest, isn’t it more likely the latter?
Also, what kind of a Christian does one become when that person is shown that we believe we have to have these nice toys to attract people? What do you think new Christians will pick up as being really important to a church?
I used to think I was an idealist, until I married Tim 🙂
Anyway, now that I am, by default, the practical one, here’s my response. Sure, it would be great if everything a church (or any individual Christian) did was out of pure motives and not selfish gain. But if the result is more people coming to know Jesus, then maybe I can excuse the playground that was built for BOTH the church kids and the kids yet to come.
I hate to use the term “a both/and church” because I have personally had bad experiences with a church that called itself that kind of entity. I think instead, that I am glad that there are megachurches where people feel comfortable going, who might otherwise feel like they would stand out too much if they showed up in a smaller setting. And I’m glad for churches like Brook Hills, where we’ve been going, where the focus (in worship) is on solid, in-depth Biblical study.
To answer your 2nd question, I guess I would agree with you. It doesn’t give a good impression to a new Christian if the new Christian is shown, by the church’s budget and programs, that facilities and such are valued over people. But at least we are still talking about a “new Christian” here…instead of someone yet to come to church.
The idealist part of me, though, does agree with you & Tim!
I’ve never really felt compelled to comment on one of your posts until now…I am by no means an apologist for Andy Stanley, in fact I don’t really have much experience with him or his church.
The one thing I think I can comment on about him is that I was challenged by listening and going through his “starting point” series. I was incredibly challenged both intellectually and spiritually listening to the series.
If the rest of his messages and church services are as good as what I heard from him in this series, it is no wonder why his church is as large as it is. In no way did I think he was attempting to “grow his church” – but grow God’s Church!
Tim – I’m not sure if you have been unfairly critizing his church, but if you have, knock it off! LOL!
First my wife, and now my brother. Ok, I repent! I repent! 🙂
Seriously, I understand what you’re saying. One of the main reasons I’ve attended the church I’ve attended the past six months is because I have found a place where there is great Biblical teaching–teaching that I feel I have needed, and teaching that is quite clear, to the point, and not a waste of my time. Teaching that I believe is making a real difference in my life, and teaching that I believe will make a real difference for Christ through all of us who attend. It has been what the doctor has ordered for Audra and me. Many people quickly realize it’s hard to find a church where this happens on a consistent basis, and those churches who are blessed to have such a gifted teacher often do grow quite sizeably!
On the flip side of the coin, I also wonder what would happen if at a church like this, the pastor leaves, and someone else comes in who isn’t so gifted at teaching. Will everyone then flock over to the next church where the teaching is better? Is this a selfish thing, or are we just starved for good, Scriptural teaching?
I guess nowadays, you can get that kind of teaching w/out going to that church, because of podcasts, etc. But I still think there’s something about actually being part of a church where you can tell that the Holy Spirit is taking the congregation to a new level through the teaching of Scripture. Hard to argue against that.