Gospel and Glitz - why the church?

"Critics worry that Jesus may be lost in the razzmatazz but growing megachurches fill vast auditoriums every Sunday with their showbiz take on Christianity. And as the big churches become bigger, the small are becoming smaller and more numerous..."

The Saturday Strait Times published a special report on the growth of megachurches. Wenjiang mentioned it in service when he was preaching and commented that it is not saying anything good about Christians (or something to that effect). His main point to challenge us to be salt and light and glorify God through our deeds, so that people will praise our Father in heaven. But I dun think it's a bad report overall, as it directly addresses the question of church growth and the issue of megachurches and small churches in Singapore. It asked the right questions on some part but failed to see a correct perspective on other parts. If the two journalists (Lee Siew Hua and Susan Long) who reported this are Christians, then they are properly not looking at the correct areas (or this might be a result of editing) in the areas of church growth. The issues being discussed are the issues which I have been grappling with.

I think I would like to take this opportunity to comment on a few issues related to what the articles addressed about the church. One question that one might ask, as he reads the special report, is why are the megachurches growing? Related to this question is why are members from smaller and traditional churches flocking to the larger churches? Being a one-church man for the entire of my Christian journey, these questions are sometimes perplexing to me. But what are the megachurches doing right that draws people to them? What are the traditional churches doing wrong? What does it mean to be a Christ centered church? Is the concept of megachurches wrong or correct?

One issues at a time. First up, the issue of megachurches. I belong to possibly one of the more populous churches in Singapore. With a population of about 4,800 on the average, we are perhaps growing at a rapid rate. Speaking for a church like this, what are we doing right? The recent ID conference that we had gave the answer. For Hope Church Singapore, the determination to follow the bible to the word and to ensure that we are teaching the right doctrine is the one factor, perhaps the most important factor for its high volume week in week out. This comes back to God's mission for the church, the one motherhood statement that Hope likes to quote but it's so darn important for a Christian:

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." - Matt 28:19-20

A church makes disciples and teach the disciples to obey every single thing commanded and taught by Jesus. I will have to say that this means it is the core mission of the church. The key question for churches is whether they are making disciples or are they simply keeping traditions? I have an article written by an elder from a methodist church in Singapore denouncing the speaking of tongues. It was an article filled with flaws and inherent bias without giving an objective look into the bible. It seems that 'they' like to keep things at status quo. I have watched movies which depict pastors demonising contemporary musics as Satan's work, thereby holding on more to traditions and driving Jesus out of the church, in the process also forgetting their mission. What megachurches seem to be doing well is to make the gospel relevant for the current generation and therefore make disciples out of the believers (who decided to join the churches) and non-believers (who converted in their churches), without compromising on the basic biblical integrity of the message. At least, this is what I see in Hope Church. And I'm not taking into account some of the weird teachings from some of the megachurches too. In fact, I have read Rick Warren's biography recently and I have to say that Saddleback Church was able to grow because of its effort to do the exact same thing while building up Christ centered and outward looking disciples. And I believe that a church grows not because of the resources that it commands. A megachurch has the resources as a result of its growth, and not the other way round. This is simple logic. A church can only start off small, with meagre resources. Hope Singapore started with 5 members. And it's a big church today. The Uni-YA congregation started off with about 220 attendees and has since grown to about 300 in 1.5 years, despite the fact that we dun have a full band and we have to move from venues to venues. That's why I think the abundance of resources is not the main reason for church growth, but rather it's what the church is doing that really matters.

However, I am not saying that megachurch is the way to go. But I dun think the concept of a megachurch is inferior to the traditional churches. This is said in the context of an objection that I have heard again and again about a megachurch: the absence of quality relationship. I have heard people saying that in a big church, you dun get to know everyone and therefore, it's not as cosy as a smaller church. The church is made out of people ultimately. And I agree that a church, whether big or small, fails if it can't connect with its members. But does that mean that quality relationship cannot be built? I am a skeptic when it comes to this and I have always argued that quality relationship happens when people intentionally build these relationships. It boils down to the individuals to make the relationship work, not the church. The church provides the environment, which consists of the weekly services, the cgs, etc. But if the people are not willing, you just won't see the relationships happeneing. This applies even for Hope Church where we restructure quite frequently. For me, it has never meant that when we change cg, the relationships become void.

Since we are into the individuals, I would want to throw in a few comments about this. One serious contention in the special report is that megachurches proach members away from the smaller ones. I think while systemic issues that exist within the structures of these churches are contributing to this phemonenon, we need to look at the so-called church hoppers as well. I have seen different people who have joined Hope Church from other churches. Some gave the reasons that Hope offers them a chance to grow and develop. Some talked about their previous churches. And the articles did talk about a group of church hoppers. It worries me sometimes to see people moving from one church to another, and never settling down to contribute to the growth of the church. This is what they call 'consumeristic Christianity' and I think we are seeing a lot of it today, even in my church. I have seen acts from leaders which are just pure consumerism. One example came from the ID conference, when I saw someone prefering to be prayed for by a pastor over another leader cos she deemed the pastor as being more senior and therefore able to confer more blessing to her. And I have heard people telling me that they find the music in our congregation (which happens to be quite basic) lousy and cannot be compared to other services. I wonder sometimes if these people are here to listen to the word of God or just simply be entertained. And I read in the report a disturbing line saying that church attendance in megachurches drop when the favourite preachers are not preaching. It makes me think that criticisms about the megachurch membership may be correct sometimes. Jesus, I believe, is lost among some of these members in the church when they set out to fulfill their own ends.

The more important issue that the churches today should address has to do with committment. Christians who belong to a particular local church must be challenged to be committed to the life and the mission of the church, and the denomination to which it belongs. This challenge applies not just to traditional denominational churches, but also megachurches. - Theologian Roland Chia 

This I believe is the key overarching issue. Committment should be a measure of the quality of church membership, instead of weekly attendance, although I believe that the weekly attendance is a reflection of what the church is doing. And the challenge to church hoppers is that they dun really have a divine right to choose weekly where they want to go and that they should not be treating this as a shopping spree. While the choice is there, God's will is for the believers to be committed to a local church. Today I believe that if the churches in Singapore and Christians in Singapore can do this well, the Kingdom of God in Singapore will naturally grow.