For the last several months, I have watched a new church building being built on the road to my house. Recently, the builders installed the church’s new sign, and I was a bit surprised. Perhaps the better word for my reaction was underwhelmed. In an age of screens and flashing lights, this sign included none of those things. Furthermore, it was simply white. The only color on the sign came from a very simple purple cross reminiscent of a Wingdings character. The script is plain and black. It is a boring sign. In fact, it’s a purposefully boring sign. It’s clear from the aesthetic of the church, its specific denominational background, and the overall “vibe” that this boring sign is actually making a rather loud statement. In all of its drab simplicity, it screams that this church will not appeal to the culture.
Regardless of your particular persuasion concerning the finer points of church sign design (I personally do like a simple design), the posture this church appears to adopt is what captured my attention. Simply put, this church is not alone in taking a public stance as “plain on purpose” and refusing to appeal to the culture. In certain quarters of conservative evangelicalism (where I happily find myself), I sense a growing movement of those who seek an intentionally counter-culture posture. In these churches, there is a growing desire to eschew anything that might be seen as seeker sensitive or like that church is appealing (acquiescing?) to the broader culture in any way.
The Appeal of Being Unattractive
At its best, there is something genuinely noble about this perspective. It is often a purist vision that the Word, the gospel, and the ordinances should be the only things attractive to those outside the community of faith. When well-intentioned, this is a desire to avoid the bait-and-switch of the seeker sensitive movement. If anything is made to look trendy or likeable, the concern is that people become attached to some form of cultural enticement, rather than the genuine beauty of the gospel. This is a laudable ambition.
At its worst, the fear of flashy becomes glorying in being unattractive. A certain pride develops around being tough, against-the-grain Christians who’ve not been softened by the siren song of culture. It revels in the refusal of modern elements and sticks the nose up at anything contemporary. This approach is somehow seen as historic and connecting to the grand tradition of the church. To the extreme, the view uses the barriers to those outside the fold as proof. Churches can make it hard for others to come and to listen. When people do come, it becomes the evidence that they are surely there for the right reason.
The Illusion of Being Culture-Free
To be fair, there is a lot of truth in wanting the gospel to be central. This should be the genuine ambition of every true church. Furthermore, I am sure most of us surely recognize some of the gross abuses of a church growth movement that was big on entertainment and light on Bible. Personally, I’m a sucker for a good high church liturgy. I can get down with a good responsive reading.
Despite the best intentions, any understanding of church practice that believes not appealing to pop cultural cues somehow places them outside of culture misunderstands culture at its fundamental level. It is a fundamental mistake to assume being plain means you are not appealing to culture. Ironically, not appealing to one kind of culture only means appealing to a different one.
There is no such animal as a culture-less version of church. This does not exist in North America, and it does not exist on the international mission field. When people push back on indigenous church ideas as unscriptural, they simply miss that every expression is a cultural manifestation of Christ’s body. It is impossible to do church in a way that doesn’t appeal to some kind of culture.
When it comes to church formation, almost every decision made is a cultural decision at some level. The architectural style and how a church structures its meeting space is a cultural decision. The songs sung and the instruments used are cultural decisions. The language spoken, the liturgy used, and even how long the service goes are cultural decisions. In fact, choosing to omit any of the above is also a cultural decision. Not appealing to “the culture” often just means appealing to your own preferences.
The Question We Should Be Asking
Instead of claiming we don’t appeal to culture, we need to ask a better question: “What culture do we have in mind?”
Truly, we do not want to give up the gospel, and we don’t want people coming to be entertained, coddled, coaxed, or sold something. Yet, assuming you are appealing to no culture creates an unhealthy blindspot. The church that believes they appeal to no culture becomes uncritical toward their own culture. An uncritical eye on one’s own, preferred cultural manifestation is a dangerous place to be. By thinking they are acultural, they bring in cultural artifacts from their own tradition, which are much less likely to be critically tested against Scripture.
It doesn’t have to be this way. When a church recognizes this truth, it can frame itself as a cultural manifestation of the gospel in a given community. This allows the church to ask which practices are God-glorifying and biblically faithful in their context. It provides a pathway to being concerned not about trendiness or seeker-sensitivity but how they are making the gospel understandable to the world around them. Finally, it gives the church the critical eye to not only judge the worldview of those outside their door but also their own worldview.