Chevy, Pontiac, and your church

The old Chevy Citation and the Pontiac Phoenix (second generation) were basically the same car with
only a few differences. They had slightly different appearances, logos and decals. But they were really the same car at heart. Automotive producers do this to market the same product to a different niche. The early 60’s Ford Falcon and the Mercury Comet are another example.  Co-operative projects between manufacturers will produce nearly identical products under different brands, see Ford Rangers and Mazda pickups. The difference is really found more in the ego of the consumer than in the substance of the car. 

If we take time to look, there is not much difference between contemporary churches and traditional churches. There is some superficial distinction, but once you get past a few decals and logos they are pretty much the same. Let’s take a look at the similarities that neither would be willing to admit.  Three examples will serve the point.

Worship: Both sing songs based on the likes of those who attend. Both tend to feature an instrument made mostly of wood which produces sound by means of the vibrations of wires, either a piano or a guitar. Both sing following the words on a two dimensional media,sometimes hung on a wall sometimes held in hand. Both kinds of churches dress as they please. Dress codes are not enforced, but subtlety expressed. Don’t believe me? Try wearing a tux to a contemporary church. The difference in worship between the two styles of churches is just that, a matter of style or taste. 

Leadership:

Within both church styles you will find essentially identical leadership systems. Nomenclature changes but the functional dynamic is almost the same. There are some highly controlling traditional and contemporary churches, and there are some low control traditional and contemporary churches. Find a leadership system in a contemporary church and you will be able to find it in a traditional church, and vice versa. 

Outreach/Evangelism/Propagation

The way both churches attempt to reach their communities is nearly identical. The near universal expectation is that outsider/non-members will come to a church event, enjoy it enough that they will repeat the visit. Hopefully, they will get involved in some sort of group, (SS class, small group, regular coffee club). The process of inclusion looks a little different in both kinds of churches, but that is more of a decal than anything substantial. 

Some years ago Oldsmobile ran a commercial with the tagline: “Not your father’s Oldsmobile.”  That theme was picked up by a lot of churches touting the difference between their contemporary style and traditional styles. But that difference was not as great as imagined. In fact, if you had a lineup with an old Oldsmobile, a new Oldsmobile, an elephant, a pine tree, and a slab of granite and asked anyone (car enthusiast or not) which two items were most alike, everyone giving an honest answer would get the answer right.

 

The question is not which is better, contemporary or traditional church. Based on the decline of Christianity in America neither seems to be working very well. What we have been doing is asking which trim package is better on a car?  It is not enough of a distinction to notice a difference. The question we need to ask is, “Can we find a better way to make disciples?”  

Next week, we will look at the worst way both styles of churches are alike and what might be done about it.