Being Missional = Build A Five Million Dollar Bridge
What are some ways a church building a five million dollar bridge makes sense?
a bridge to allow relief workers and oppressed people better access to goods and services…
a bridge in an area of the world decimated by a natural disaster…
a bridge in an adopted village…
That would make perfect sense.
But that’s not what is happening here.
No, this is just a good old fashioned materialistic atrocity being championed by an American church that is so disconnected from the real world value of money that it would rather build a five million dollar bridge over a sensitive environmental area like wetlands so that its parishioners can get out of the parking lot in under twenty minutes.
Is there any reason, any reason at all why a megachurch should spend $5
million dollars building a bridge? For a second exit? In a wealthy Georgia suburb?
Andy Stanley tries to explain:
Is it worth it? It all depends. If our mission is to be a church thatʼs perfectly designed for the people who already attend, then we donʼt need a bridge. But if we want to continue to be a church unchurched people love to attend, then yes, itʼs worth it. From my perspective, this is not a “nice to have” option. Honestly, I donʼt want to raise money for, or give money to, something thatʼs not mission critical. I believe creating a second access point allows us to stay on mission. That is why weʼve been working on this for nine years.
This makes me sick. This is completely un-missional. Missional churches are not attractional churches. Missional churches send out their parishioners as missionaries to the world, not bring them to church over a five million dollar edifice set up to speed up their exit and entry?
Your thoughts?
5 Comments
Submit a Comment
SUBSCRIBE:
I Support
Why is it always for people with a point of view i.e. the Missional Church Movement that every expenditure that does not fit the modern definition of missional. Two observations. The best approaches are both and not either or. If this bridge simply accommodated transfer growth you might have an argument. But the statistics show the large percentage of persons who attend have been won to Christ through the people and programs of the church. If they can reach more people with the gospel they are missional. I would also say that if that was all they are doing and not going into the community to touch people where they are and the philosophy was only come (attraction) and they neglected the missional component found in “go” then Jesus critique of the Pharisees is appropriate. This you should have done while not neglecting the other (paraphrase)
Missional churches do both. First you send out the missionaries for the purpose of showing, giving, and communicating the love of God in ways that will speak to the recipient exactly where they are at in life. Then you help connect them to a church for growth and spiritual maturity. Missional isn’t only doing the first part. The missio dei is participating in the mission of God to reach those who need His love in their life and connect them with the bride of Christ (in both conventional and never-before-seen ways).
This bridge is helping do both. It is very missional. After all, missional is not some pigeon-hole effort of a bunch of young hipsters. It is a variegated, many-faceted effort of churches that do accomplish the missio dei in a variety of ways.
Just because it may not fit your narrow viewpoint of missional doesn’t mean it isn’t missional.
Unfortunately, churches like Andy Stanley’s have decided that if they want to do something, that God is on their side.
As a pastor, I can think of SO MANY OTHER PLACES that the money could be spent.
Time for this church to re-think its grandiose schemes…
Pastor Dee
I heard that $1 can provide a 3rd world person clean water for an entire year. So instead of helping 5 million people GET water, they are helping 500 or so people AVOID it?
How about finding another place for those people to meet?
this is posted on the bridge site:
· Are you tired of sitting in the parking lot for twenty minutes after church?
· Do you hesitate to invite friends to church because of the complexity of getting on and off our campus?
· Have you ever skipped the closing song to beat the crowds to lunch?
ever skipped the closing song to beat the crowds to lunch? really?
carpools? shuttle transportation? walking? biking? start a running club to church? start a thousand simple/house churches – anything but building a $5 million bridge – now that for the first time in the history of humanity there are 1 billion people in the condition of hunger (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=a_2tiWgUKZWo)
3.3 times the population of the U.S. – perhaps Sarah Silverman could work this into her vatican sketch . . . ? thanks for the post.