Security

I've had a number of posts I have wanted to do, all reasonably long so I have to find a chunk of time to do them. But this one is one of those that if I don't do it soon, I'll lose the thoughts ...

A few years ago, David Murrow wrote a book called Why Men Hate Going to Church. Decent book, which in my opinion only has a partial diagnosis and is woefully short on prognosis and solutions. Part of the diagnosis is that the church focuses on a few points that ends up chasing men away. One of these is "security". The modern church is big on providing a secure environment. Just how far this has gone has become painfully clear recently.

I live about a mile north of New Life Church in Colorado Springs. A few months back, a gunman came on their campus on a Sunday, and ended up shot to death by an armed security guard. With this being a church of thousands, I have no problem with that. Actually doesn't surprise me -- years ago I volunteered with a church's benevolence program, and we had a female cop with us as one volunteer. Came to find out in time that she had been encouraged to always bring her gun (concealed of course) with her while attending church and volunteering -- something I was glad about the night we were assigned together to interview a woman who came looking for help who was clearly schizophrenic and we worried she might be a danger.

But now the news comes out that the senior pastor of New Life has been talking about security at pastors' conferences and consulting on the issue of security. He is encouraging churches to have armed security forces. Apparently he is even encouraging churches to consider having metal detectors and handbag searches at the doors.

What we must realize though, is that the medium is the message. What do armed security forces visibly patrolling properties say? It reinforces a fortress mentality of churches. It says to the world this is an us vs you situation. It sends so many wrong messages.

And to me, it reinforces the message that churches are selling security in the first place. I believe an unspoken, implied message of so much of what passes as church is selling security. Come to church somewhat approximating weekly, tithe, etc and feel secure in your eternal destination. Now, I know what is said, but the medium is the message, or in older terms, actions speak louder than words. When membership "covenants" or however expectations are spelled out occur, the message ends up being eternal security in exchange for being a good member, despite our words about grace vs works.

Truthfully, though, the walk of a follower is about having eternal life now. There are no promises about security and safety. In the U.S. we get a false image of things -- worldwide, by some estimates, 1 in 200 who profess to be Christian will die a martyr's death. When you take out of those numbers the Americans and others who don't live in countries where Christians are physically threatened, those numbers get frightening. And even in the U.S., being a follower of Christ can threaten one's economic security in certain career fields -- Hollywood, politics (in certain states), fields with high percentages of homosexuality among those in the field, higher education, etc. Traditional churches will not readily appeal to those in some industries, nor the way the culture is going, it will not appeal to future generations. What is needed, whether we realize it or not, is something resembling the underground churches of China and India.

While this is not a reason to pursue redemptive communities, which should be pursued for their own merits, it is a benefit evangelically. Small communities provide a better medium for the message than the megachurches, and are more likely to survive the future than the megastructures.