How Comfortable Is Your Church?

Reprinted with permission from Voice magazine, July/August 2010.

I opened the door to a freshly painted, warmly decorated church foyer. It was my first time in this rural church of less than two hundred members. People were talking together in small huddles. Some were laughing; others were listening with concern. They greeted each other with hugs. They seemed comfortable and at home with one another.

I made eye contact with a few and smiled. Some looked away; some smiled back, but none left their group of friends to greet me. I took a bulletin from the table and walked into the sanctuary…alone.

The sanctuary was beautiful. Soft music created a worshipful atmosphere. I walked half way down the aisle and sat on the end. People began to fill the pews around me. Several excused themselves to step over me, but no one talked to me. Soon the room was filled, but I felt alone.

For over a year, I attended twenty different churches with similar scenarios. I was an undercover pastor’s wife, disguised as a visitor. My mission: to observe. I chose to accept this mission in order to help my husband lead our new church family ten hours away. Dave was already there, but due to a flat housing market, I stayed in our old town trying to sell our house for almost three years. With many Sundays free, I seized the opportunity to visit other churches.

I visited all types—conservative and liberal, various denominations and sizes. I visited to learn what is being taught (and what is missing) from pulpits. I visited to know which churches I could confidently recommend to others. I visited to get ideas for programs that work and didn’t work. I attended churches to see how it felt to be a visitor.

What did I see through my visitor glasses? Sadly, all of the questions below were answered in the negative by some church at some time. However, some churches made the “Places to Return” list. What reasons drew me back?

People said more than “hello”

Did they stop to introduce themselves, or did they say, “Hi, how are you?” in passing? Did I catch two women pointing at me, whispering,”Who is she?” but not coming to ask? (Yes, that really did happen.) Did someone offer to hang up my coat and show me the location of the restrooms? Did anyone get to know me by asking more than yes/no questions, for example, “What brings you here today?”

I may have brought a heart full of needs. It may have been my first time in any church. We don’t know a visitor’s story, but we do know each presents an opportunity to minister encouragement and love, and possibly even the privilege of leading them in the final step to salvation.

The church where the woman said, “Hi, my name is ‘so and so’. I’m glad you’re with us today. Would you like to come sit with my family?” made the list.

Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by this some have entertained angels without knowing it. (NASB, Heb. 13:2)

Personal contact made after my visit

Was I invited for lunch after church? Did someone offer to accompany me to the visitor reception following the service? Did one of the elders call later to see if I had any questions about the church? Did I get a form letter from the church, or a handwritten note? Churches are built one relationship at a time.

The church where the pastor’s wife sent a personal note that included, “We’re praying for you” made the list.

Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor; not lagging behind in diligence, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord…contributing to the needs of the saints, practicing hospitality. (Rom. 12:10-13)

Members have good relationships

Did all ages greet each other—kids, adults, teens—or were there age cliques? Did I overhear gossip? Did people walk past each other without acknowledgement? Our greatest testimony to others is our unity and love for one another.

The church where I observed a woman consoling and praying with a younger woman made the list.

Walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing tolerance for one another in love, being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. (Eph. 4:1-3)

I remembered the sermon

Was I still mulling over a biblical nugget a few days later, or was it the flashy graphics and flawless oration that stayed with me? Did spiritual seed take root, or was the experience an emotional balloon that fizzled during the week? Was the sermon packaged, or was it spoken from the pastor’s heart? Was I distracted from the meaning by a flippant, dry, or showy presentation? Did the sermon contain something for the mature believer, as well as the seeker?

The pastor that stimulated me to reread and meditate on the sermon text in my quiet time made the list.

And He gave some as…pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ. (Eph. 4:11-12)

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires. (2 Tim. 4:3)

Members brought their Bibles

Did the congregation know their way around their Bibles? Did I hear pages turn, or did the congregation depend on an overhead? Did the people take notes? Did the sermon points come from the Scripture text, or did the pastor read a verse or two to back up his outline? We learn the heart and mind of God by listening with an open Bible.

The church that revered the Word of God made the list.

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:16-17)

Reverence for God and the cross

Was respect for God shown through all aspects of the service—announcements, music, sermon, prayer, and appearance? Were the leaders and congregation attentive to and aware that God was present, or were they lulled by meaningless formalities? Had reverence been compromised in an attempt to change from traditional to contemporary? What was the goal of the service, to promote a certain style of worship, to inspire people to be better, to grow in numbers, to entertain, or…?

The church that honored the Savior made the list.

I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ… that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings. (Phil. 3:8-10)

Prayer was important

What did the people pray about? Was the pastoral prayer packaged, or from his heart? Did prayer requests have a balance between health issues and spiritual needs, between individual needs and global needs? Did leaders give public prayer support to believers in other places? Was there a mid-week prayer service? Content and participation in prayer is a barometer of the health of the church and its individuals. The church that prayed in accordance with God’s heart and mind made the list.

… we have not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so that you will walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, to please Him in all respects, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God; strengthened with all power, according to His glorious might, for the attaining of all steadfastness and patience, joyously giving thanks to the Father. (Col. 1:9-12)

People were involved: loved the lord and others

Did they participate to please a personable pastor? Did they think spirituality was a flurry of church activities? Did the programs meet needs, or tradition? Were they intent on developing mature relationships with Christ? Were the people willing to serve outside their comfort zones? Was attendance out of desire, or duty?

The church where the people participated with passion and courage, according to their spiritual gifts, made the list.

For just as we have many members in one body and all the members do not have the same function . .. since we have gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, each of us is to exercise them accordingly…he who gives with liberality, he who leads with diligence, he who shows mercy with cheerfulness. (Rom. 12:4-8)

Conclusion

Most ministry leaders do not have opportunity to attend other churches. Even on vacation, we often worship with families and friends. Consequently, we do not have opportunity to listen to the heartbeat of Christendom.

What ways can a ministry leader get to know the spiritual influences on the community, the religious teachings of the area churches, the needs of the local population, and how it feels to be a visitor? Visit churches that meet at times when your church does not meet (i.e., Saturday nights, Sunday nights, midweek services, seasonal services, special programs and speakers.) Send board members to visit different churches every quarter or so. Give them specific things to observe. Use their report as a base for constructive discussion and proactive brainstorming. List the various churches in your community and research their websites on the Internet. Visit a different denomination on vacation.

How does your church look through visitor glasses? Does it reach beyond what is comfortable to promote spiritual growth and service? Is your church comfortable, or is it inviting?

Now the God of peace…equip you in every good thing to do His will, working in us that which is pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen. (Heb. 13:20-21)


Connie Fink grew up as a pastor’s daughter and is now a pastor’s wife (serving with Dave, her husband for almost 30 years). Currently, they live in northwest Illinois and are between pastorates.

Discussion

Here’s another quote in Connie’s article:

Is your church comfortable, or is it inviting? This was another question that is a point which is, in part, what I was addressing. So many worms in this can.

… how are we going to find out what their needs are if we are consumed with our own concerns? I thought that was the focus of the article, not “Here’s how to decide where to go to church”.

We probably disagree here, based on opinion, and Connie does address that it is her point of view. I respect that… I really do. The intention was very kind and thoughtful, but the questions asked in examination, whether for self or as a visitor which IMO is where the article leads us to which is both sides of the coin. This in turn lead me to the points I was making—addressing both sides of the coin—not just the “how to find a good church” side.

I also think we may be defining the word ‘guidelines’ differently. To me, guidelines is a very loose term- sort of like the lines on each side of the road. However, it isn’t wise to stray out of your lane, which is defined by a different more specific set of lines- KWIM? General guidelines are just a starting point, or the outer boundaries.



I think a lot of our definitions are mixed, which speaks to multiple variables. You’re exactly right and I completely agree. Outer boundaries or guidelines should always start at Scripture since we, as you aptly said, don’t know how will be gracing the doors of our church. It is the only objective way to judge things. It is the outer guidelines, general guidelines, principles, umbrellas, etc. should always start with how does God see things. What are His theological, general demands? And then move to what is His focus? Which would dictate the more specific set of lines like should we give this much to the church or should I regularly babysit so and so and how to live within church life, etc. I agree with Alex’s statement which I think addresses this point, adequately:

Finally, she never had any intention of joining any of the congregations she visited so her detachment was exacerbated to an unreal level. Hence any remedy we may attempt to produce when addressing a church’s experience for a visitor, I do not believe is going to benefit from this narrative.

Now, it is I who must go away for a bit, so I’ll look forward to continuing this sharpening (for me) discussion a bit later. Thanks, Susan! :)

On that basis, I would love to see more discussion on this forum on some of the important criteria for your spiritual growth and ministry. Thanks, Connie, for this exhortation! :)

The use of the word “comfortable” is a play on words

[Connie Fink]

Again, this article was never intended to be a doctrinal statement, an exhaustive theological treatise, or a theological “journal” article. Let’s not continue to judge it to that standard. It’s a personal, reflective, discussion-provoking, growing piece. Also, hopefully, it is a springboard for other individuals and groups to creatively identify, discuss and revise according to Scripturally-based priorities and their convictions. On that basis, I would love to see more discussion on this forum on some of the important criteria for your spiritual growth and ministry.
I do not recall anyone demanding it be an exhaustive theological treatise or evaluating its validity because it was not that or a theological “journal” so I see no one who has judged it to that standard. I have seen others imply this is what was attempted by those offering an evaluation that was not overwhelmingly favorable, particularly of me, but of course that was not the case.

My analysis brought into focus the overriding question of the implausibility of your initial claim (bold mine):
What did I see through my visitor glasses? Sadly, all of the questions below were answered in the negative by some church at some time. However, some churches made the “Places to Return” list. What reasons drew me back?
And my contention, that it is rather implausible that in a single visit to any church the extensive list of questions could be answered, particularly to the degree you published, remains. However, I did offer the possibility that you had sub-consciously mixed what you believe are important features of a healthy church with some of your experience and your article ending up being a combination of both, however that is not the premise of the article.

I am more than happy to discuss the value of the ideas you presented apart from my concern that such determinations are very unlikely to be properly be made with such a narrow exposure to a congregation. But I will not allow my evaluation to be characterized in a light that does not represent its own premise and the detailed analysis I presented to justify my concern. If you simply wish to discuss such values of a healthy congregation I think it is worthwhile. It was my intention to not revisit my analysis and let it be but since you made reference to evaluations of the article I certainly felt obligated to respond. Your efforts to discuss the topic remain appreciated and your years of ministry experience are acknowledged.

Alex,

If you go to a restuarant once and decide you don’t like it, why should you continue to eat there?

If these hold true in the physical realm, how much more so in a spiritual realm where we have the illuminating Spirit and eternal Scriptures to guide us as to what is good?

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

I appreciate your intention of introducing an analogy but it does not address the issues raised with respect to the plausibility of the questions which were asserted to have been both asked and answered to the detail they were in such a narrow visit. One certainly can visit a restaurant or a church and in the brevity of a visit determine they do not like it, that is not in question, rather the idea determining details of a ministry (and for that matter the analogous restaurant) to the extent that was stated in the article in such a limited context.

Alex, you’re still missing the point of the piece. How a church interfaces with first time visitors is/ought to be extremely important to the people of the church. How they are perceived by outsiders is something they ought to take very seriously. We all know that perception and reality can be miles apart, but for the first time visitor, their perception is all they have initially and if they are in a location where they have many options to choose from for a church home, that perception is a legitimate factor in narrowing the list.

And a piece about what kinds of first impressions a bunch of real churches created is a good way to remind us all that this matters.

As for the biblicalness of the criteria, two things…

a) Scripture calls us to wisdom. There are a zillion things that prudence commends that we do not need specific verses for.

b) We know from 1 Cor 14.23 that first impressions do matter

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

No Aaron, I got the point and in fact addressed it in many of the points I covered in the analysis. However along with observing that point I was simply addressing the implausibility of the assertion that all the questions were or could be answered in the narrow exposure of a visit as was the basis of the article.

[Alex Guggenheim] I appreciate your intention of introducing an analogy but it does not address the issues raised with respect to the plausibility of the questions which were asserted to have been both asked and answered to the detail they were in such a narrow visit. One certainly can visit a restaurant or a church and in the brevity of a visit determine they do not like it, that is not in question, rather the idea determining details of a ministry (and for that matter the analogous restaurant) to the extent that was stated in the article in such a limited context.
But if you don’t feel comfortable visiting, do the details really matter? You seem to believe that people won’t mind a bad introduction to the church once they get used to it. If you come to visit my church and receive a hostile greeting from everyone there, then what’s the point in determining if the doctrine is all right?

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

[Jay C.] But if you don’t feel comfortable visiting, do the details really matter? You seem to believe that people won’t mind a bad introduction to the church once they get used to it. If you come to visit my church and receive a hostile greeting from everyone there, then what’s the point in determining if the doctrine is all right?
Your response contains two points I wish to deal with, your ending illustration and your initial question which is critical to the whole issue. First your illustration is very far removed from anything commensurate to what Fink or anyone else has offered by way of real or possible negative experiences. I know of no person, myself, and would challenge any reader here or anyone in their periphery to tell of a time they visited a church where “everyone there” gave them a hostile greeting. That is a rather exaggerated if not all together unlikely scenario. It is much like asking what if I visited a church and everyone there said I was ugly. In both cases I find it to be highly implausible that this would ever occur.

But to the essential point and one that is the crux of the matter. What if you visit a church and don’t feel comfortable on that visit? Do the details matter? Of course they do. There are so many biblical imperatives that charge us with just and fair investigation in matters, mature deliberation, careful consideration, and thoughtful exploration before judgments are passed that I doubt I need post such references but by way of record:

John 7:24
Judge not according to appearance but judge righteous judgment
We in fact do not judge according to appearance or shallow and limited experiences. That is not to say such narrow exposure won’t yield some experience but these are just what they are, very limited and incomplete experiences. As believers we do damage in teaching one another that such fractional investigation is sufficient to make a charge of appropriate or inappropriate with regard to congregations, people and ministries unless the most outlandish and egregious arises which would be rare and if so, it is more than like it would have already come to our attention. If, during such limited frames we believe we have observed something or experienced something that raises a concern we are to apply patience and consideration in waiting to gain further insight into the matter. This obviously would require discovering the details of a matter so that we may rightly understand any misconceptions on our part or the nature of the event itself in light of the rest of the ministry. Yes, details do matter, very much so.

I know of no person, myself, and would challenge any reader here or anyone in their periphery to tell of a time they visited a church where “everyone there” gave them a hostile greeting. That is a rather exaggerated if not all together unlikely scenario.
I know of a number of instances personally where churches that were doctrinally sound made visitors feel uncomfortable. There may have been the usual shake hands with your neighbor, take a visitor card, or introduce yourself ritual but never a personal welcome that went beyond a nod. In one of the churches visitors were talked about and their reasons for visiting questioned at the pre-service prayer meeting in the evening. This was somewhat uncomfortable for those in attendance who had invited the visitors. Visitors were never contacted by the church, even if they filled out a visitor card, unless they specifically asked for a visit from the pastor. In one church visitors happened to sit in the pew where “Uncle Billy” and his wife always sat. Uncle Billy stood there and stared at then till they moved.

"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan

Your comment and the quote are not compatible. The quote was a reference to an earlier exaggerated example of “everyone” in a church treating someone with hostility. Your comment only views portions of the membership and is vague in its attribution as to who actually is responsible. But the issue isn’t the quote and its extreme and unlikely scenario, however your general scenario is one I have seen claimed.

And it leads me to a further consideration, namely the inappropriateness of blaming an entire church for such isolated incidents. In counseling people who are not taught how to identify their offenders often over-extend blame or projection onto innocent parties as blame for offenses one experiences is an issue that has to be remedied with learning to blame only those responsible. And here is a good example in the scenarios suggested.

A person did not get a “personal welcome” from the limited people to which he was exposed and subsequently makes the mistake of blaming the entire church. In other words, persons A, B and C did not offer his what he demands as an expected greeting and he includes all others that are members of a church in his disapproval . Instead of saying, “that church” made me feel uncomfortable the person claiming to have been offended should identify only the people that failed to meet his expectations.

Of course it is rather telling of a person’s disposition when their chief complaint about a church revolves around their demands that they be greeted in a certain manner or visited without making clear this is their expectation.

But again this speaks to the biblical instruction that we not make hasty judgments, rather that we employ patience and consideration in investigating and discovering the facts as well as avoiding the tendency to “spread the blame” when certain parties are only to blame, and even in the examples such blame appears quite dubious seeing that it has to do with demands of personally tailored greetings and a visit from the church without that person every giving any indication this is their desire.

I over the years I’ve attended quite a few churches. But, I am only going to report how Hamilton Square welcomes her visitors. First, we get visitors not just from the City but from around the world. On any given Sunday morning, we could have visitors from the Richmond District of San Francisco, Australia, Germany, Cornwall and one of the Home Counties.

After the firs two hymns and the invocation. Pastor Innes or who ever is in charge in his absence will ask first time visitors to raise the hands so the ushers can give them a welcome packet. The packet contains a brochure, a visitor’s card w/ a sticky cloth red rose bud (for the blouse or lapel) and a cd of Pastor Innes’ sermon “What is a Christian.” Yes, we have the shaking of hands after the choir number and before the third hymn. It’s as much to allow the choir to take seats in the congregation as any thing else.

After the service, we have coffee, punch, and sweet stuff. This allows an opportunity meet the visitors. During the winter, it gives folks the opportunity to fortify themselves with a cup of joe before facing the elements.

Hoping to shed more light than heat..

The first time I visited a large IFB church I was asked to raise my hand and fill out a visitor card. Tuesday night 5 or 6 young men (it was Greenville, SC :) from the church came to visit. (I hadn’t asked for a visit.) Two of these guys had been children together on a mission field and didn’t know each other and they were visiting me. It made an impression.

Do you suppose that it’s possible for our churches to have a welcome center where church information is available for visitors should they desire? Do you suppose that individual members would recognize visitors and extend them a personal greeting? Do you suppose a visitor could come to church and not be asked to raise his hand, stand up and introduce himself, or remain seated while everyone else stands?

"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan

[Ron Bean] Do you suppose that it’s possible for our churches to have a welcome center where church information is available for visitors should they desire? Do you suppose that individual members would recognize visitors and extend them a personal greeting? Do you suppose a visitor could come to church and not be asked to raise his hand, stand up and introduce himself, or remain seated while everyone else stands?
It’s not only possible, but most of the IFB churches I’ve attended have a ‘welcome center’- such as a desk in the foyer- and visitors are greeted, shown classrooms, bathrooms, water fountains, the nursery, etc…

On a side note, it can be difficult at times to remember to be welcoming. When you have kids that need to get to class, you’re serving in the nursery or in some other capacity, there are weddings and showers and other activities to plan… you can walk through the doors of the church like you are clocking in at work, completely focused on tasks that you must accomplish instead of ministering to people. Folks aren’t being snubbed on purpose, but that’s exactly how it appears to the visitor who walks in and few if any acknowledge their presence.