Monday, 23 March 2009

New Ways Of Doing Church?

Ever wanted to visit a drive-in church? Now's your chance... click HERE.

Have you ever visited an on-line church service? Try HERE.

So what did you think?
Have you experienced any other creative church environments?
Do these qualify as a church?
Please leave a comment and lets get chatting : )


Anonymous said...

The drive in church strikes me as lazy. Can't be bothered to get out of the car to walk to church and only go if it's minimal effort/inconvenience. I'd be interested to know why people go to such a church. Maybe there are reasons that would make me think again about these initial perceptions. If you can drive there, then it's not too much effort to get out of the car and sit on the grass. It's quite consumer oriented and sitting in the car doesn't allow people to serve and communicate. On the other hand, if this is the only way people are going to go to church, let them go in a way relevant to them.

Online church is a more modern version of the church services that used to be broadcast on the radio - a blessing for those who were sick or unable to physically get to church. Great for those wanting to take in a service mid-week.

I don't think there is ever any substitute for attending a traditional church service. If church is about community, then online and sitting in the car doesn't really cover that except potentially in very impersonal ways. On the other hand some people can make a traditional church setting very impersonal by simply not getting involved or getting to know people.

I've been to a church service in a forest once. It was beautiful. A lovely setting - but present were people. To me, we are the church, the people are the church - and online and drive in doesn't bring the church together in a personal way where we can edify and care for each other. I'm not even sure that Sunday church services are necessary - but somewhere along the line the church/people need to be contacting and interacting and serving. I think this can be possible however we do church but some methods lend themselves to it better than others.

In the end, different strokes for different folks and as long as they are moving closer to God, it's good.

Clive Smit said...

Hey Anonymous... I think your comments had great insight!

I certainly believe very strongly in the need for community and authenticity.
That's why I really like the online service as they have a chat room before and after the service.

I suppose the thinking behind the drive-in church is the anonymity...

I think's use of the on-line service is excellent as their goal is to use it as a bridge to get people into a real live service.

Ps Mark Driscoll dislikes the idea of an on-line community as their is no eldership who can speak into people's lives and give church discipline and discipleship.
A worthy consideration.

Anonymous said...

Glad you liked my comments. :-) Your post comes at a time where I am questioning what church is to me and how that community outlook translates into 'doing/being church'. I want to be where I can be all I can be and where I can use my gifts to their fullest. To do that I had to step out of my own church. Yet part of church is also being edified while we edify others and I'm not sure I have got that part sorted yet. I'm giving out a lot but maybe neglecting feeding myself a bit. Is a home group enough? Possibly. I think this is closer to what church was in the early decades. I kind of sense I'm on the verge of a breakthrough in defining this for myself but it hasn't been an easy process. A great time of growth though. :-)

Kev said...

Have you ever thought just because you put the word church after something, it doesn't make it a church.

Anyone got a great biblical definition of church? When was the church first called the church? Does the bible even use the word church, what is used in the original text?