Excellent post! It reminded me of George Hunter's The Celtic Way of Evangelism.

I t is good to question methodology, but really that is what is being talked about here. Our culture is changing, and so must our methods. Again, it seems that the spiritual hunger is truly a researched and known reality just as "felt needs" were in the 80s-90s; so, we are no different in predetermining what a guest to a church might expect or desire by proposing this very thoughtful approach of Abraham. Retooling for today and the future means addressing the hunger. However, I fear we sometimes spiritualize methods to a point of dogma whether it is seeker sensative or bedouin-like hospitality.

Thank you for a thought provoking post. I do ont interpret your article as just focusing on methodology, but also the goals of our gatherings.

Well I've kind of been contemplating moving toward the "user unfriendly" model. You know like:

If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
and...
And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
and...
So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
and...
Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
and...
Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
and...
And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
and...
But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.
and...
Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
and...
Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.

Talk about user unfriendly.

Well said Skye. As a "younger church leader" myself, I find the Biblical language and action of hospitality to be one of the best uses of my time. Not as a method mind you, but as a way of living that naturally expresses the has come/is coming Kingdom.

I spent a lot of time in the houses of my two best friends during my high school years. Not once did either of my friends' parents have anyone over to their homes that I observed. Not for a meal, a drink, or a conversation. I once asked one of these friends if his parents ever invited anyone over for dinner. After he thought for a moment he said he could not remember even one instance of his family sharing a meal with someone else. The more I listen, the more I realize this is not an uncommon experience for many of my peers.

Hospitaltiy is certainly more than sharing a meal, but maybe we could begin there. I'm not sure we can even imagine what would take place if a church began to take hospitality seriously. It's exciting to consider.

Hospitality is a key issue. This is maybe why so many new emerging churches in the western world are choosing a monastic model (intentional community, abbey, nu-monastery, etc) over the traditional ecclesiastic model that has existed since Constantine - and i include the seeker-sensitive model here - to provide hospitality through accommodation and cooking to strangers and seekers.

hmmmmmmm

Two points:

1. I take exception to the idea that the church was "hospitable" before the dawn of seeker-sensitive churches. My recollection of the 1970s church was of a church where holiness was a high priority, and the church was neither welcoming to sinners, nor hospitable, nor seeker-sensitive. Church was where you went if you were a goody-two shoes. Not-good people ... or people who didn't like to wear suits or ties ... were not especially welcome.

The "hospitality" model you discuss seems to have gone out of the church when it lost contact with it's middle eastern roots. While I agree it would be wonderful to bring that tradition back, I take exception to the implication that this was the rule before the 1990s when the Seeker-sensitive model (with attendent book, "Inside the mind of unchurched Harry and Mary") came into existence. It was not.

2. So while we're discussing radical hospitality, I point out 2 John 1:10-11, which instructs Christians not to welcome false teachers. So clearly the idea of hospitality has limitations, as we are required to ask questions and NOT extend hospitality to such.

All the same ... much food for thought here, in an area often neglected by our culture. Thanks!

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Younger generations often have a need to be radically different than the ones before. This is often a good thing. But is there really a need for abandoning seeker-friendliness for hospitality? Does there have to be a difference?

In my opinion you should rather seek to be a fresh spirit into a seeker-friendly church than opposing against a movement that has, after all, lead people into the nearness of God. The church need our opinion, but we need to be humble for the visions of our leaders and elders. If we do so we can continue building on something good, instead of starting all over again all the time.

Apart from the "aggression" towards seeker-friendliness this article was good. We certaintly need the hospitality to bloom in our churches and homes.

I went to a seeker-oriented church for fifteen years.

Skye Jethani seems to be offering hospitality as a new defining virtue. Much of the debate about seeker-oriented churches centers around methodology worship and worship styles. Rather than spend tremendous amounts of energy putting on a spectacle each week (even if it is for God), we can spend Monday through Saturday worshipping God through ordinary hospitality to the people around us.

Hospitality is an accessible virtue. I don't need a lot of money or artistic genius to be a good host.

Hospitality is about personal relationships and humility. It doesn't dictate style or method so much as heart.

Hospitality is about meeting the needs of a guest. Seeker-oriented churches that anticipate the needs of a guest are simply trying to be good hosts. Such deliberate and often rigid planning doesn’t work for everyone, but it can still build relationships and glorify Jesus Christ.

As much as we talk about finding a personal relationship with Jesus, we shouldn't forget to find a personal relationship with each other. That's hospitality.

Great thoughts. According to statistics the average church ends up reaching less than 6 people for Christ a year. As a 25 year veteran of ministry I find that the average Christian tells less than 3 people (I might be a bit generous with this number) a year about how to know Christ in a way that encourages a response. This does not have anything to do with a wide vs narrow road. It has to do with the church and its people not doing a very good job sharing Christ with others.

Another part of this equation is we (the church) do not excel in helping Christ Followers mature. There is somewhat this negative view of maturity in our culture so many people just don’t want to grow up. It would be an amazing life change for every one of our teachings was a better blend of “what” and “how” verses a lot of “what.” We keep telling people what they need to do, what God wants them to believe, say, do and become but relatively few give practical “Here is how you do it today” input in our messages.

Along with this, as Christian leaders we often recruit followers instead of building leaders. One of the key roles of the pastor is to build leaders to do the ministry and to create and implement a biblical process by which other people are coming to know Christ, growing to maturity in Christ and finding the ministry they have been uniquely called to do.

As the pastor of a new church (less than a year old) we have tried our best to do all three of these things all of the time. We are constantly seeking to reach people for Christ, Grow them to maturity and then help them discover their calling and purpose. This has implications on the ministries we develop, the style of ministry we embrace and how we see each pastor’s role within the body of Christ. (It seems to be working so far, we have grown from a group of 50 people to a group of just over 350. We have seen nearly 180 people make decisions in the direction of Christ either to give their heart to Christ for the first time or to reconnect after a long absence from the faith. We have a ton of leaders running ministry and helping in nearly every aspect of growing a new church.)

One final thought. Power of the Gospel is God’s power. It is not enhanced by my style nor is it diminished by my weaknesses. In the greatest theological treatise ever penned, the Apostle Paul starts the letter to the Romans with the declaration about the Gospels power and importance in the role of the faith of every church and believer. He then tells us much of the “how” in growing up as Christians. We call that Sanctification. Finally we read in his words much about what it would look like for us to become fully devoted followers who have found their purpose in Christ. I believe that the author of the book of Romans give us not only a process for every believer in Christ but a blueprint for the Churches we are to build. Thanks for reading my ramblings.

I believe we are called to present the Gospel in a way that people of our time and culture can hear it. Jesus did this as did Paul. For me, this means to strip away whatever gets in-between a seeker and him/her understanding the need and opportunity for salvation. Unfortunately, much that is found in a traditional church experience gets in the way of a bigger experience - meeting God.

I base that statement on my own experience. I was saved at the age of 28 in a so-called "seeker-sensitive" church. I would never have willingly darkened the door of a traditional church...I had too many of those 70s-era church memories from childhood of wearing a red badge and being asked to stand up in front of all those people when visitors were announced. Not to mention the weirdness of pews, hymnals and frilly dresses. Sorry, I know that may sound almost sacrilegious to some of you but for someone who isn't familiar with the ways of church, it's reality. Church was always an odd place where I just did not fit in...I didn't know the "code" and it was either boring or uncomfortable or both every single time. Little wonder that I was unable to comprehend a single word of the Gospel being presented. I didn't own a Bible and even if I had, I would have had no clue how to find the verses being referred to. I could go on and on but you get the point. Call it "seeker sensitive" or "seeker friendly" but I call it a way to bridge the gap created by religion so that I could meet Christ. Thank God for it and I pray that the willingess of the church to meet people where they are never goes out of style.

I have visited a number of churches that are tagged "seeker-sensitive", including Willow and Saddleback. As a visitor I was treated with a great deal of warmth and as much hopitality as I wanted. I observed people from a variety of ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds. So, to be honest, when I read this and other books and aritcles written from the "emerging" sector I find myself not so much in disagreement with what is said but simply wondering why it is necessary to be critical of churches and leaders in the "seeker" sector. It seems to me that leaders of emerging and seeker churches are attempting to do exactly the same thing that Jesus modeled for us. He was a master at using the cultural images and values familiar to those around him in an effort to communicate a very important but unfamiliar and risky message. Some emerging church leaders would lead us to believe that all the world is post-modern. I lead a large church in Eugene, Oregon where the tie-dye tee-shirt was invented and DEA helicopters searchinig for pot farms are a common sight, and I can tell you it's not true! My point is that there is still plenty of need and room for both. Emerging church leaders need to be careful to not repeat the same mistake that every previous generation of church leaders have made by presenting themselves and thier experience as the highest and final link in the food chain. We should only applaud anyone and everyone who continues to effectively communcate the gospel, see growth in thier churches through evangelism and authentic spiritual transformation and community emerge. To assume that someone is inhospitable because they might meet in a strip mall and don't light their sanctuary with candles is just silly.

We should never stop seeking, per se, but focus our efforts on the needs at hand. Where many have gone wrong is becoming so sensitive that they are distorting God's truth in order to please men rather than teaching the need to please God, become new creatures in Christ and the need for a Saviour. The world is being misled by only hearing the Good News, being told what they want to hear - an emotional appeal in order to keep people happy and tithing - an emotional appeal that can be easily cast aside if we don't take into consideration that there is bad news accompanying the gospel if we make the wrong choice and follow the world. A truth that makes it all about me rather than what Christ did for me. It may not be a popular truth - but we are all sinners - some of us have been saved by grace by choosing to accept and believe in Christ's work on the cross, resurrection and return some day and live for Him, serving Him. Others may have an awareness but find it doesn't fit their lifestyle or aren't fully convinced yet of the need for a changed life. We must be friendly and love the sinner, just not the sin. We also fail when we become judgmental or condemning in pointing out those sins, forgetting whence we came. This is why use of the Bible is important - keep self out of it - make it about God and His relationship with us and what He expects of us.

Always the pendulum is swinging.

Church history is filled with leaders reacting to the reactions of previous leaders, always bringing the arm of the pendulum back to what they believe is more biblical. As this article shows, the grand tradition continues.

I believe there is a difference between being "driven", and being "sensitive". In terms of hospitality, a guest-driven host would only prepare what his guest desires. A guest-sensitive host would invite the stranger to join him in his already planned meal or activity, all the while helping the newcomer to understand and appreciate any unknown customs or tastes.

This is how our congregation tries to welcome the "strangers" in our midst and it seems biblical and it seems to be working.

I like what Dr. Christine Pohl, professor of Christian social ethics at Asbury Theological Seminary said: “Hospitality in Greek is 'love of strangers'. Welcoming strangers had great significance for the early church. Hospitality meant welcoming outsiders into personal space, mostly a home, and offering them food, shelter, and protection.”

I think the challenge for leaders is to be creative with this, or as Paul puts it “…be inventive in hospitality.” (Romans 12:13b Message). So much has to do with the atmosphere of our churches…and that’s an issue no matter what size the church is. Frankly, I can think of nothing worse when I’m visiting a church than being asked to stand: that’s an introvert’s nightmare. But there are key things that make me feel welcome…and a lot of that has to do with the vibe.

By the way, that’s not just a church thing. I would hate to be singled out at a party. Perhaps an interesting conversation might focus on atmosphere…and how different personality-types respond to different “air spaces”.

I think the telling comment is that the people come hungry for God. The manifest Presence is not available to model or formula. Are the cults delivering the healing spirit, soul and body that is seen in the Bible but not in the churches that proclaim the Bible? The cults and 'isms' can only deliver a counterfeit, but hungry people may settle for that. Profound deep spiritual encounters with the Living and Risen Savior are possible and available. Pray until your church connects and then allow Him the freedom to touch His people--the good the bad and the ugly! If you share a meal with people in the meantime, fine--just never major on the minors.

It seems in your post that you did good research as to the missing elements in some churches. I don't believe however that we are fighting for as you implied: "not ignoring language, church tradition, etc." Christ even said those were the wrong things to fight for. Who cares about those things. Our identity should not be church tradition as much as Christ himself.

It seems the more I read about Seeker Sensitive, the more people are ready to trash it and then replace it with another model, the very thing they despise (a model). You claim a church model is consumer driven. Anything for people then becomes "all bad". There are some philosophical problems with this approach. While looking to other church traditions (monastic etc.) We can learn some things, but to say we must now revert to monastic tradition is in itself contradictory of your valid point about seeker sensitivity. Maybe the monastic practices hold their own faults and have their downsides. Maybe it is time we stop worrying about the form and just love people. Who cares if they find Christ through direct mailing and young churches with hip children's programs or through authentic expositional, verse by verse, hosting with questions later.

When you made this comment, "the responsibility to be hospitable is no longer felt by individual members of the church." I agree in some circumstances, but hasn't this been a problem from day 1 of the church? Paul wrote his letters to impart the ministry of the believers. "Lumping it" and saying that church members no longer feel the responsibility is a generalization and a fallacy that isn't true. This is a culture problem, individualism. The same problem Paul faced and that you and me faced. There is nothing new under the sun...

We can continue arguing about these things, but let those who wish to reach the boomers, reach the boomers. if you desire a new post modern approach then don't hack on someone elses expression of the church, which is different than yours and mine for that matter. i think when all is said and done, churches have to change, period. Models change, cultures change and we are changing fast...Lets embrace it and encourage one another.

interesting thought eivind. but as a pastor from a "younger generation" it seems as though my peers and students (high school and jr high) aren't seeking to feel comfortable, but rather seeking genuine spirituality & community. i'm observing that they like to belong in a community filled with diversity and mystery, not a place where you fill out a welcome card and you are called or visited by someone in the same profession/town/grade within 24 hours.
i praise God for what He's done through that model and approach, but i also believe there has to be some principles that are as true now as they were in acts when the church was being formed. being hospitable, as i look through history, seems to be one of a couple of principles~
thanks for the thought provoking posts~

Why can't a church be seeker sensitive and hospitable at the same time, i always thought that was the whole point? I also think there is a difference between being seeker "sensitive" and seeker "driven". There are churches and people that seem to take ideas to extremes.

There are great "traditional" churches that reach people, help them grow spiritually and there are some lousy "seeker driven churches" that are just plain unhealthy and vise-versa.

Let’s find out what God wants to do in our local church and do it instead of trying to find some magical formula for success.

At our church we have been practicing hospitality in a variety of ways - such as having small tables and chairs in the foyer along with coffee and doughnuts - inviting the whole church and especially newcomers out to lunch - and having greeters in the foyer and in the sanctuary.

Terry Williams, Wickenburg, AZ.

I thought your article was interesting, however it may have neglected to research the various areas of our country. Different parts of the United States view hospitality differently. On top of that jobs and such require those people to shift location and consequently they bring their customs and preferences with them. In the Pacific Northwest, it is fairly difficult to get people together with others that are outside of their established circle - churched or not. I think that the term "do all things in moderation" is important when reaching people. Therefore swings instead of balance may be dangerous. We do not know who our guests are or what they may be expecting, all I know is that I need to be ready for what they need (inhouse or resourced). I need to be ready for a variety of styles and I also need to have a well rounded staff that I can lean on for support if I am unable to meet the needs myself.

God has brought each guest to our church for a reason and He will not give us more than we can handle - so I don't think we should over analyze things. Although, being aware of styles and trends is important to educate ourselves with just in case we need the information.

Wow…so many posts, and so few talking about hospitality in homes. The New Testament context for church was most often the home, where hospitality is most difficult and yet most meaningful when offered with humility and honesty and love. Looking back on 10 years of ministry in Central Asia, we have found our most significant church planting experiences have happened around our dining room table where seekers have come hungry for spiritual truth, ready to enjoy a meal and each other and God’s word. This very hospitable culture has taught us the art of lingering over cups of tea (or Coke or coffee). Around the table we talk and laugh, we unburden our souls, we are forced to look conflict in the face. What better place to think and talk about God’s work in our lives? What better place to examine our hearts for hidden sin and unresolved problems in relationships? Around the table we can come clean, we can reconcile, we can reflect. We can enjoy together the mercy God has poured into our lives, and in this way worship him.

Over the last few years my husband and I have been captured by a vision of house church. We have been overcome by the beauty and hope of living for Christ with the help of a small group of believers who meet together, not in fellowship halls with hundreds of others, but in our homes—the places where we are most truly ourselves. Within this intimate context we have the best opportunity for shedding all falseness and self-protectiveness. We have the greatest opportunity for each of us to express our gifts for the building up of the body.

People are hungry for Jesus, but how can they meet Him in me if I’m not willing to open up some very intimate spaces of my life to them? In my opinion, true Christian hospitality begins at home, and true church happens in those unguarded places where we can share the truth of who we are and Who He is.

Why not both?

The writer notes that the "epoch of the seeker-church continues to wane...." What does he base that on? Willow's attendance does not seem to reflect that nor does the continued popularity of Saddleback CC.

The reason to be a good host is to touch and be touched in Christ. The reason to make church services gel with visitors is to "be all things to all men that I may win some for Christ". However there is a counterbalancing need to host the family of Christ as well as to host strangers, and there is a need to reverence Christ as a church family, not only to be part of the market place clamouring to be heard.

In whichever phase one is ministering, self centredness and arrogance can destroy the witness, and because you cannot always be doing all things, others will always be able to assume you are off track and get into admonishing and discouraging.

As long as each ministry is done in Christ, with His heart, in humility and not pride, He will use it to His glory. Let's accept that Satan wants us decrying each others' ministries, instead of learning humbly from each other and continually reviewing our direction together.

This has generated a large number of responses. Perhaps it strikes a common nerve. After several decades of being submerged in various methodologies, I am more and more convinced to "start with the end in mind", but there really is only one end. It is not targeting, conversion of others, church growth, or any of the other "ends" we have pursued. If you are hospitable, or reach out, or give someone a cup of coffee, I hope for myself to just be motivated by the upwelling of God's love and transforming power in my own life. Our desire to be with and please God is end in itself. I realize this isn't very profound.

I think the article makes a good point. Of course hospitality plays a large part in opening doors and building relationahips of trust. However more important and pertinent to the post christian, post modern era is to go outside the church and listen to people rather than wait for the pre christian to come to the church so we dump our package on them. It is amazing how opportunities open up when we listen instead of get hung up on giving them the good news according to our interpretation.

Fascinating series of posts! Once again, and until Jesus returns, our best musings only confirm two never-ending realities or tensions faced by faithful thinkers and followers of Christ - "we will always see through a glass darkly" and "we really do need one another." Exciting days for the Church.

Of course seeker-sensitive is okay: but we must realize that there is only one seeker, and the unrepentant Joe who wanders into church accidentally one Sunday is not him. God is the seeker, not man. As far as being hospitable in church, that is less a function of the church as an institution and more the function of inidividuals within the church itself. Also, it seems that a large part of the problem is the paradigm shift that has taken place when we ask, "What is the Church?" and "What is the purpose of the church?" It's hard to commend seeker-sensitive churches who try to draw people to the church, when the whole of the New Testament pictures the individuals within the church wading out into the culture throughout the week and gathering on Sunday hungry for the Word, for fellowship, and for encouragement. We would do well to think about that.

It strikes me that the 'welcoming' of strangers extends particularly to children. "And whoever welcomes in my name one such child as this, welcomes me" (Mat 18:5)

Unfortunately, the modern church hardly ever 'welcomes' a child; truly wants a child in their midst; benefits from the child being there (with their parent/carer); recognises the 'divine' presence in the child. The 'Jesus' comes with the child, doesn't generally fill in the welcome card.

Rather than being welcomed children are put in church nurseries and exiled to Sunday SChool. Made to endure liturgies that are inaccessible - and are even disciplined to boot when they wont sit still.

Children are invariably marginalised and neglected. Unless the church were to target 'families' - parents and children - in a radical way, it appears the child will always be the 'stranger' to us;

Until the childis truly welcomed, segregation, isolation and separation from the community (in the name of 'ministry') is one way the church will continue to ensure its demise, and irrelevance to the families that wander through the relational desert of society, with their children.