I’ve been troubled by Richard Mouw’s defense of church shopping, published recently in Christianity Today; I have a great deal of respect for Dr. Mouw, but I think he’s really missed the boat with this one, and I’ve been trying to figure out what needs to be said in answer to his article. As such, I was grateful to see Anthony Sacramone’s response today on the First Things website; he makes some points which really need to be made, and I think he makes them well. Check it out.
I can see the point of both sides of this issue and I think there is a healthy balance.
Sacramone’s arguement seems to focus more on the diverseness of secondary theological issues between protestant churches as a reason to stick with one.
In my opinion, the primary reason that we should be loyal to our local church is because we have a COMMITTMENT (we should be a member), we should bring our tithe there, we should be under the authority of our local church and MOST IMPORTANT we are meant to build one another up in Christ, bearing with one another and belonging to one another. The only way to do that is to get with one another on a regular basis. It doesn’t just happen by sitting beside each other each week during the sermon.
On the other hand, however, I find that I need to check out other local churches worship services just to get a healthy perspective of what God is doing and what church is really about. Churches get stuck in their own traditions and the people become carbon copies of one another. Sometimes I just need to get out and breathe! As a women’s bible study leader, it gives me fuel to bring back to my group. (That’s why I am a bit of a conferenc junkie too)
I am interested in what you have to say about it Rob?
I don’t think that’s quite square with Sacramone’s argument; I think his point is rather this, that the differences between us are too significant to be dismissed offhand without effectively dismissing the importance of theology altogether. I think he’s right about that.
As well, I think you’re dead on about the importance of committing to and being a part of a community; this is the other major concern I have with Dr. Mouw’s argument, that it effectively dismisses that as a concern. Where I’m still processing my response to his article, and my concerns about it, is that I think both these points come down, at least in part, to ecclesiology; I think the primary flaw that underlies his argument is in his view of the church (or perhaps in the absence of one). While I’m no Catholic in my view of the church, I’m becoming increasingly convinced that Catholics are right in their view of the importance of the church, and I think that’s the pointer to where Dr. Mouw has gone wrong. I’m still mulling this, but I expect I’ll have more to say about it.
I would note that I agree whole-heartedly with your last paragraph; one of the downsides of being a pastor is that you can wind up with a pretty myopic view of the church if you’re not careful. (And as for conferences, I’d really encourage you to come next year to the Symposium on Worship up at Calvin; there’s a broad range of speakers and topics, many of whom/which are absolutely wonderful, and I especially love being there for the worship services.)