Is it helpful?
If you've been around Northfield recently you would have noticed that the culture of the church has changed a bit. along with the new building and how it impacts the feel of the place, we have welcomed Stephen Holly into the church as the contemporary worship pastor. With heading up that role, he also preaches quite extensively. Stephen is a direct character of the charismatic fold who is bold in his preaching and worship leading. Northfield is not used to this. As a church we're used to just plain nice preaching and worship. Within the YA group I've begun noticing how they don;t come to church when Stephen is around. It's almost a if they would Rather rnot be challenged by him and go where it is a whole lot easier to be a Christan.
But I do think this trend has it's root in the theme of "if it is not helpful, leave it behind". We apply this thinking to so many aspects of our lives. I now wonder if it is useful that we only follow the useful stuff?
posted by Aiden at
10:30 am
subscribe to feed
3 Comments:
Barrie, a colleague, emailed me this comment:
Do you really think that someone who comes from a Charismatic fold (whatever that is) and speaks and sings differently could be used as an example of making it hard to be a Christian?
Maybe they just don't like his voice?
By
Aiden, at 11/08/2006 07:50:00 am
my understanding is that the word "charismatic" is used in two different ways.
a) meaning "using the charismata", refering to the gifts of the Spirit in 1 Cor 12 (in fact, the word charisma in greek means "gift"). In that sense, I am most definitely "charismatic".
b) meaning over-the-top and in-your-face kind of spirituality that doesn't respect people's natural and personal inhibitions. I hate that.
If the church I was a part of and was comfortable with (which I chose precisely because it represented a spirituality I had confidence in) suddenly introduced a worship leader/preacher who significantly changed the atmosphere, I would also leave.
My sense is, before the church blames the irregular worshippers for a "lack of committment", stop to consider what other means they have to communicate to good 'ol Northers that they're NOT HAPPY with the Clown Show! Is Northfield listening?
p.s. because of the common usage of "charismatic" in the second sense, I actively promote worship at my church as NOT charistmatic, so that people who fear being embarrased by "charismatics" will know that they are safe to come to our worship services.
By
barry, at 11/13/2006 03:55:00 pm
is this thread about charismatic churches vs no charismatic? or is it about a preacher who makes you think and challenges you vs one who tells you stuff? if its about the first, i say go team, for both; everyone needs a different form of stimulation. i personally can handle both, if i'm in the mood
if its about the second, i think that the youth nowadays are being overloaded by the flashing neon lights of the boulevard world. in the words of John Doe from Seven: "you can just tap someone on the shoulder anymore, you have to hit them over the head with a sledghammer."
people need to be shocked. sometimes its the only way nto get through to them and get them thinking. the method of shocking people into listening is a very unskilled and tactless way of doing it, but its effects are undeniable.
then again they can also have the effect of watching a particularly freaky horror movie that makes you look over your shoulder for one week, and then forget about it.
its also a bit hollywood. then again i've never heard the preacher being mentioned, so don't really know...
By
Eonblue, at 11/23/2006 07:47:00 pm
Post a Comment
<< Home