I recently saw a free book at my school titled, Downtown Church: The Heart of the City by Howard Edington, which I thought was going to be a book on urban ministry and so I took it and brought it home. Once I started reading it, however, I soon realized that I was misguided. The book was instead on how the pastor had led the church to build a proposed 21 million dollar building project (30 million in today’s money, and it almost certainly cost more to actually finish) so that they could properly “do ministry” in the city. Here is an excellent quote that summarizes the book: “Here, then, is a cold, hard principle for the downtown church: secure enough property to make the church’s ministry viable. Beg or borrow the money. Spend whatever time it takes, but get your hands on the property you need.” This got me thinking about church building projects and how needed or useless they are. So, what do you think? Do you have to build a new church campus and buy a lot of property to carry out ministry? If so, then how did the early church carry out its ministry without owning property and buildings?
5 comments:
The need for a church building will vary according to the ministry of the congregation. If it is designed as a house church, it only needs members with houses. However, most churches today have a much more varied ministry. I think the argument shouldn't be so much about buildings, but about ministries. The building grows out of the activity.
First Baptist Dallas is spending a lot on a new building...but if it lasts as long as their last one, it will be worth every penny. Over 100 years ago FBC invested a huge amount of cash to build their current sanctuary. How come the critics fail to honor the frugality they've shown in using that building so long...or in not moving to the suburbs? I don't think we can impose expectations that they stay in a building that is outdated and difficult to use for modern needs. I'm sure that the critics were there 100 years ago, too.
I enjoy your blog. Keep it up!
Interesting comment. I have not heard many people defend FBD. It is definitely something to keep in mind.
The problem with the "beg/borrow" angst behind getting a property is it does more to shape the ministry of the church--not to mention define it--than the scriptures do. If a building is that central then every ministry that occurs after that point will be defined (and limited) by the design, age, shape, location, and floor plan. Urban centers are shifting sands of influx and out flux of peoples. We need to be able to be mobile, not just to be able to move from one neighborhood to the next, but since our urban centers are ethnically diverse, we need to be able to follow the networks brought to our cities back to their sources. A strategy that centers on bringing everyone to a central point simply overlooks the dynamics of the modern city.
Post a Comment