The Christmas Sunday debate
Wednesday, December 7, 2005 at 11:09PM In case you missed it, some American megachurches have cancelled Sunday gatherings on Christmas Day. There's been a lot of reaction, most of it negative:
"This is a consumer mentality at work: 'Let's not impose the church on people. Let's not make church in any way inconvenient,' " said David Wells, a professor of history and theology in Massachusetts. (Telegraph)A church can compress two services to one, cancel Sunday school or cancel an evening service. Those are all secondary issues that fall under the "better or best" type of reasoning. But to cancel church altogether simply to cater to the desires of unbelievers is a whole different matter. At the very least the pastors should be waiting by the door to greet those who arrive. Even if no one walks through the door, at least the pastors have taken a stand for what is most important to them and have modelled Christ's own love for worship. (Tim Challies)
It is past time that these sorts of churches be called to account. It is time for them to realize that they have simply capitulated to the larger culture's agenda on issue after issue, in this case in supporting the worship of the idol called family in place of the worship of Jesus. (Ben Witherington)
Scot McKnight has posted a "mild case in defense" of these churches. He (I think) attends one of them. Scot gives nine points. Here's a sample:
This leaves us with this: no strong correlation between Sabbath and Sunday; no commandment to worship together on Sunday...what I’m reading is that there is too much identification of “worship” with Sunday morning and too much identification of “being the church” with “attending a Sunday morning service"...So, my suggestion is this: let’s be a little more charitable in light of what the NT does and does not say. Let’s permit our brothers and sisters, once every seven years, to make decisions that we might not approve of but know that they answer to God, that we answer to God, that it is about worship of God and incarnating the gospel in our world for the good of others and the world.
I spoke to a pastor today who's still going ahead with both morning and evening services on Christmas Day. I was amazed. Evening services are almost extinct in these parts.
Of course, we were saved from this debate most recently by a leap year. In 1999, Christmas came on a Saturday. The next year, it jumped to a Monday.
We are going ahead with a morning service, although I really don't know how many people to expect.
I am actually more concerned with the New Year's Day gathering. Last time Sunday was on January 1, I was one of maybe ten people at church.
Update: Cerulean Sanctum weighs in with a good post.
Update 2: Between Two Worlds writes, "I think that McKnight has the a better Scriptural case than Witherington. And I appreciate McKnight's call for a bit more charity and irenicism. But I still think it's legitimate to question the rationale and motivation for this move."
Reader Comments (19)
Darryl, Thanks for the link.
We're going ahead with Christmas Eve and Christmas Day - although we are simplifying Sunday AM, shortening the service from 75-90 min down to 1 hour New Years Day, we will do the same - again I have no idea how many to expect. We didn't think seriously about cancelling the services, although we did play around with the idea of moving New Years Day to late afternoon or evening and combining it with an informal meal.
The ten people who gather on New Year's Day are worth it. With all the emergent pontificating about church growth types doing things because of numbers it is interesting that one of the reasons for not meeting on Christmas day or New Years is that not many would come. McKnight's quote to cut them some slack rings hollow. Will they be meeting on Christmas Eve? Why is it a great offence to alter our schedules so that we can worship God but no big problem to put God out of the picture since we don't do it very often? Why do we need a direct commandment in order to stop us from cancelling a service? Why do we not love God enough to recoil in horror at the thought of not being able to worship Him. Why do we take the "I need to do something for me" attitude into the throne room of heaven? Why can't we see that this is not just about missing a church service? I have tried to be patient and understanding about the emergent "conversation" but this and the upcoming meeting between emergent leaders and "emergent" Jewish leaders is deeply concerningbecause it is just wrong. The meeting with Jewish leaders is a meeting with people who need to be saved from sin and we want to learn about how to worship from them. Some "conversations" are not worth having.It is abandonment of Truth.
I think that there is no such thing as bad press. CNN broke the story as I recall, and it seemed funny to me that all of a sudden they cared what Willow Creek and Northpoint did. I think the general public could care less, and the most upset seem to be those who still think God lives in a building and must be worshipped on Sunday. Sorry for the cynicism.
Ken: I don't think there is anything emerging about this issue. Most of the churches that are mentioned are seeker churches, not emerging ones. Re: the Jewish issue - don't take me there in this post! Maybe I'll post on that separately. Maybe. For now you can comment here: http://www.emergentno.com/2005/12/emergentvillage-meets-with-jewish-leaders" rel="nofollow">http://www.emergentno.com/2005/12/emergentvillage-meets-with-jewish-leaders The key issue to me isn't the cancelling of a service, but the motivation, which does seem to be a little off.
Darryl, OK then. So the Sunday thing is not an emergent issue. One does not need to be emergent to get things wrong. In fact listening to most emerging types one wonders if anyone else can get it right. But McKnight makes it an emergent issue by his criticism of those who disagree with not meeting on Christmas Day. He accuses them of identifying "church" with Sunday morning and "being the church" with attending a Sunday morning service. Nice straw man he builds up for the sake of ripping it down. Somebody says that meeting for corporate worship is important and all of a sudden it is the totality of what they think the church is. The New Testament happens to value corporate worship. We could trash Paul for telling people to take up a collection on the first day of the week since that means he reduces the church to the offering! As far as the Jewish dialogue thing goes - I just wanted to make sure that you address it.
Well, I think Christmas is what you make of it. However, in these discussions, we are not talking about individuals who wish not to partake in the true Christ-mass, these are Christian churches that feel Christmas is more about me than about He (Jesus). What does canceling normal Sunday services, let alone closing church the day of Christmas, one of our holiest of days, say to the non-Christian community (or even to God) about our Christian ways? Is the Christian faith a convenience or a conviction? What is the focus of Christmas? The gift of a Savior or the gifts under the tree? For more rantings about the War on Christmas and other thoughts, go to indigolake.blogspot.com
Ken: I still don't see the "emergent issue" in Scot's remarks since presumably we all (emergent or not) agree that the church includes, but is more than, a regular gathering of people. I also don't see the issue as one of meeting vs. not meeting, since virtually all the churches involved are meeting the day before. For me the issue is this: does our celebration of Christmas reflect a completely different set of values from that of the world? Is it about Christ and the ordering of our lives around him and his kingdom? Or are we buying into the world's script of consumerism and what works best for me? This issue bothers me a lot more, because it's possible to hold a Christmas Day service and still be off the mark.
I just wanted to say that I am not going to comment on this post because I will write something I shouldn't and then have to email Darryl and ask him to take it down because I am getting attacked by people who think that worshipping God only happens in the "sanctuary" at a building we call a church on Sundays at approximately 10am.... oops.
Amazing. Complain about churches who cancel Sunday morning church because people would rather unwrap gifts to themselves uninterrupted, and you get accused of believing that Sunday morning is the only time that one can worship. I do not complain about those who cancel church because I believe that God resides in a building on Sunday morning. I complain about it because it is a statement that people will worship together unless there is something better to do. To say that we can worship at other times and other places is supremely not the issue. The issue is that even though they usually worship corporately at this time and place they will not this week because it is too inconvenient or it won't get many out to the service. That is a strong statement of the sorry state of the church. To say to those who complain about the cancellation that they put God in a box on Sunday morning at 10:00 is to completely miss the point. And it is wrong. David Wells, Tim Challies and Ben Witherington do not believe that at all. We should not presume upon the motives of those who are concerned about the sorry state that this move represents.
Ken: Let me see if I understand you. You're not saying that going to "church" on Sunday morning is a boundary marker of who's in or who's out. You're saying that this decision reflects two things: - Churches that make decisions based on pragmatism, and - That our priorities are out of whack - we'll gather unless we have something better to do Is that accurate?
Darryl, Yes, that is my concern. Somewhat similar to the churches (mostly mega) who cancel church for the Super Bowl or have a Super Bowl service. What was getting my temperature up was the insinuation that those who complained about churches closing on Christmas Day think that there is only one time and place to worship corporately. But now that I have had a night's sleep and someone (thank you Darryl) has understood my point, I feel much better.
Ken - I guess my concern is that you make a sweeping generalization that all these people are staying home to "unwrap gifts to themselves uninterrupted" and they "have something better to do". What a heavy judgement! Isn't that a little harsh? Is there something "better" about coming to the church building than worshipping at home with my wife and kids on Christmas? Why do you indict all of us on charges of selflishness? We made the decision to cancel because we wanted people to be able to spend the day with their families - yes, uninterupted. A real "sabbath type" activity. But I guess there are those that will judge us for it... and assume that we cancelled for selfish reasons.
Uhm, we aren't having a Christmas service either. We are having a Christmas Eve service and a Christmas banquet and a Christmas party for the kids... A holy week of sorts. erm. Anyway. I hear you Ken and I hear you Tim. Personally, ( because somehow it always is ...isn't it?) I am relieved that we aren't gathering on Christmas Day/Sunday. It gives me and my husband an opportunity to enjoy what other bodies of believers are doing to celebrate Sabbath on Jesus' Birthday. So it won't be a Mega church or our own "home" church, cuz they is closed. But how cool for us to maybe check out a Mass or an Orthodox service or/and break out the bible and read the story to my unsaved family over breakfast and burn some incense ( provided by my unsaved, angsty baby brother)? Anyway ya'll, my 2 cents and Feliz Navidad!
Tim, Thanks for getting back to me. Harsh? I am mellow compared to what I used to be. Sanctification is a slow process. Touche (too shay)on your comment about generalization. You make a fair point. I should have said that that is the motive for many. Heavy judgement? I don't think so. You and I both know that that is precisely what many people will do since church is cancelled. There ought not to have to be a choice to make between going to church to worship God with the saints and worshipping Him together as a family. I would say "Yes", it is better to worship with your family with other saints than it is to just worship at home with your family. This has nothing to do with the building. Shoot, meet outdoors. If you have a house big enough, invite the whole church over to your house. The early church was devoted to the apostles' doctrine, to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer - together. And so should we be. When Paul addressed the fathers and children in the Ephesian church his Letter would have been read in church where families were meeting together in worship with the other saints and the fathers and children would hear the instructions given to them. A church service takes one or two hours for most churches, and that still leaves a lot of Christmas day to worship and have a family day together. In fact, on special days (Christmas, Father's Day, Mother's Day, Thanksgiving, Easter.) we cancel the evening service so people can spend time with their families. Do both! It seems to me that going to worship God with the body of Christ is a powerful statement to our children that God comes first, even over family time. Please don't misunderstand. I believe family time in worship is crucial. We have four children ranging in age from 23 down to 12 and we (well, my wife 99% of the time) honmeschooled them all because we believe God gave them to us to raise for Him and win to Him. They are all still at home and each one of them would be opposed to not going out to meet with God and our church family on Christmas day. The church is a community and we need to do as much as we can to foster real community life, to show the fellowship of the saints, to meet with our extended family, especially on special Christian holidays. Absenting ourselves from the worship of God with the saints helps foster a sense of Christianity that leads to more individualism. We need to do all we can to foster community. There is also the matter of the lonely and depressed and hurting people who come to church, in part because it is the one place where people are genuinely glad to see them, where they talk to people who believe as they do, where they get a hug that means something, where their loneliness is assuaged. My church has many of them and I would guess that yours has its share too. Cancel that necessary time in their week this year so I can worship without them at home? I wouldn't and couldn't do it. Our church is the only family many of our people have. Corporate worship is a foretaste of heaven in more ways than family worship is. Paul tells us to speak to one another in Psalms hymns and spiritual songs ... We are lifting other saints up when we worship with them as directed by the Scriptures. Can we do that at home? Of course! But not at the expense of the other, even if it is only once every several years. Heaven is where people from every tongue and tribe and people and nation gather before the throne of God to worship. We have almost thirty nationalities in our church and as lovely as our family is (and it is extremely lovely) it cannot be thirty nations all worshipping together. Well, this was not meant to turn into a sermon. I'll give you extra points if you can guess what I do for a living. I appreciate your comments to me. Thanks Darryl for allowing the conversation to take place.
Well Ken, I see where you are coming from. It still seems a little legalistic to me. I want my kids to see that God comes before everything too, but it has very little to do with whether we go to church every week. I think we need to be careful that we don't get too passionate about a cultural construct to the point that we use it as a guilt trip. Our weekly service is simply the way our culture works. If we really wanted to be "Biblical" we'd meet daily downtown... :) We decided to have a Christmas eve service instead, which I look forward to. Apple cider and good friends and family. Candles and singing and prayer for the oppressed and downtrodden. Remembering the incarnate Christ. Sweet.
(sigh)I see that there's no point in making my point. I am a slave to "cultural constructs" but at least it allows me to lay guilt trips on people. Sure am glad after two thousand years of christianity people have finally exposed the great conspiracy.
Ken, Just because I don't agree doesn't mean you haven't made your point. I think you made it well. Just because I see your argument from a perspective that you didn't intend doesn't make your point any less valid. I do see our "services" as a cultural construct and in many ways started as pragmatism, and I do think it has become a new "law", but I say emphatically that I agree with your emphasis on community. Just as many assume people aren't going to church because of selfishness, there are those of us who assume everyone who goes is going because of habit, instead of a deep desire to experience and discover community.
Celebrating ChristmasMegachurch bashers are at it again. This time around it has to do with Christmas services. I hadn’t noticed it earlier, but apparently the news that many of the larger churches around the country have decided not to hold any services Christmas m...