THIS IS MY OPINION.At first, it seemed like a very good idea to make ourselves more appealing to those who were not familiar with Pentecost. Our first step was making some very reasonable adjustments toward greater inclusiveness (as well as perhaps preserving a significant percentage of the membership we already had) by changing some of Practical Commitments. Then, only in a few progressive churches at first, there was a move toward what we now call seeker-sensitive churches. The sentiment is one to be respected, but the net result, I am afraid, was to cause a largely permanent dilution of Pentecostal worship. I recall a post here a number of years ago that, in so many words, indicated that traditional Pentecostal expression was weird.Eventually, we reached a tipping point. We had--perhaps with the best of intentions--tamped down our traditional Pentecostal expressions long enough, had drawn in enough people who did not engage in weird behaviors, had diluted the congregation with a mix of Pentecostals that had changed their ways and groups that had no example of Pentecostal expression to follow, etc., that we no longer did it like we used to.I want to say that I am no exception to this case. It can indeed by a challenge to really worship when those around you aren't. It's like going to a John MacArthur service and shouting out Hallelujah at some point he's made: It's not going to well-received, I imagine. As much as it might be important to ramp people up to Pentecostal expression, I am afraid that, in many cases, that ramp has worked as worked in both directions.
Quick links
FAQ
Register
Login