In church, bigger isn’t better. It’s just…bigger.
A great article by Sally Morgenthaler (the worship guru for many church leaders and the major proponent of “worship evangelism”) brilliantly dissects the appeals of mega-churches, why they’re growing, who they’re actually attracting, and simply and devastatingly lays out why the worship in most churches has the effect of actually distancing people from authentic connection with God:
It would appear that we’re more than capable of creating our own view of the world, and we tend to promote and perpetuate that view in our sanctuaries and worship centers. Somehow, the show goes on… even if most of the unbelievers we thought we were reaching either weren’t there in the first place, or they left the building some time ago.
Early in 2005 an unchurched journalist attended one of the largest, worship-driven churches in the country. Here is his description of one particular service:
“The [worship team] was young and pretty, dressed in the kind of quality-cotton-punk clothing one buys at the Gap. ‘Lift up your hands, open the door,’ crooned the lead singer, an inoffensive tenor. Male singers at [this] and other megachurches are almost always tenors, their voices clean and indistinguishable, R&B-inflected one moment, New Country the next, with a little bit of early ’90s grunge at the beginning and the end.”
They sound like they’re singing in beer commercials, and perhaps this is not coincidental. The worship style is a kind of musical correlate to (their pastor’s) free market theology: designed for total accessibility, with the illusion of choice between strikingly similar brands. (He prefers the term flavors, and often uses Baskin-Robbins as a metaphor when explaining his views.) The drummers all stick to soft cymbals and beats anyone can handle; the guitarists deploy effects like artillery but condense them, so the highs and lows never stretch too wide. Lyrics tend to be rhythmic and pronunciation perfect, the better to sing along with when the words are projected onto movie screens. Breathy or wailing, vocalists drench their lines with emotion, but only within strict confines. There are no sad songs in a megachurch, and there are no angry songs. There are songs about desperation, but none about despair; songs convey longing only if it has already been fulfilled.”
No sad songs. No angry songs. Songs about desperation, but none about despair. Worship for the perfect. The already arrived. The good-looking, inoffensive, and nice. No wonder the unchurched aren’t interested.
The church that I left recently just took on a pastor that is a big proponent of the mega-church model: demographically tested musical styles, programmed services, multimedia displays, the works. Sally’s article only serves to reinforce my instinctive distaste for the approach – how soulless, calculating and spiritually threadbare, and above all, how ineffective it can be. As Sally says and as Scott has pointed out on his blog, statistically speaking, the approach isn’t drawing in and growing unchurched people looking to connect with God. It’s just moving church people around from place to place – wherever they can find a more entertaining experience and programs that fit their “lifestyle”.
If you’re interested at all in church leadership or practice in the evangelical context like I am, read the article. It’s worth some serious thought.
