Instead, I think we need to be hospitable to guests in our wourship. We do what scripture calls us to do in worship–even if it is mis-understood and ucomfortable to the non-Christian–but we recognize that we are hosting guests and help them to navigate what may be wierd to them.

Do we need to care for non-Christians in our worship? of course! Should what they want be the final authority in what our worship conisist of and looks like? Absolutely not!

I also stick by my original assertion. Paul is specifically reminding us to be thinking about “outsiders” in the way we conduct our meetings. This is separate from the issue of having an interpreter — that was for when anyone speaks in tongues, which he did not say to avoid. In this verse, he’s warning us about everybody speaking in tongues, which he is specifically telling us to avoid. He’s basically telling us to strike a balance.

The reason I don’t like “seeker-sensitive” is because it’s generally used to go too extreme into seeker-sensitivity rather than striking a balance between what “we” want (members of the church) vs. what we need to do to reach out to outsiders. What Paul meant by “seeker-sensitive” here is this: speaking in languages people don’t understand is fine, but only if you have an interpreter so people can understand you, and don’t everybody do it at once, or outsiders will just think you’re nuts (I Corinthians 14:23-28, Derek’s Paraphrase).

My conclusion reveals more about how I consider this in a modern context — if we are properly considering outsiders, we will not have problems shedding non-sacred traditions (which are most of them) when they are acting as an obstacle for outsiders. We will not have a problem using relevant cultural language (including music styles) to reach out to outsiders. Most churches today have extreme problems with both of these issues.

It’s not that we need to make outsiders feel comfortable — Paul specifically talks in the passage I quoted about the outsider being convicted. But he clearly indicated that we are not to overindulge ourselves at their expense.

While I completely agree on your thesis about the three main purposes of corporate worship, I would also argue that if you accomplish the first two, the third will naturally flow. In other words, we don’t have to try to be “seeker sensitive” (a term I personally hate) if we are truly revealing Christ (revealing God and sharing life in fellowship).

Paul’s original argument on tongues was that if you speak in tongues, there should be an interpreter because that way the saints are edified … all of them. The seeker knowing you’re of God is something of a byproduct. Not that we shouldn’t be sensitive to seekers …. just that when our goal is to truly reveal Christ (not based on our own agendas, but His) and to give to others instead of get, a true seeker will find God in that.

By the way, reading the Bible and other history, it was always the people willing to change to something “new” or return to the truth that actually made a real impact for the kingdom. That’s what I want.

Peace out.

Seriously, though, there’s been some stuff brewing in my head for awhile, and then the stuff Pat’s been talking about lately, combined with the stuff from Catalyst, and I’m getting ready to burst. I’d say I’m already bursting, actually.

You’ve seen a lot about following Jesus, sharing life, and investing in others in my posts lately, and to be honest, I didn’t come up with that, Pat did. (Though Pat would be likely to say he’s just paraphrasing it out of the Bible.) But it’s now part of our identity at Faith Community. It’s the basis for the new logo, it’s a part of our mission statement, etc.

But a lot of what we do (and by “we”, I mean American churches as a whole) doesn’t really focus on any of that. I think it’s time to change that.

But to answer your question, yes, I think it can happen in today’s churches. But it will take a lot of guts on the part of leadership to propose and implement anything significantly different. But there’s too much at stake to sit back and be idle.