Mahler, J. (27 March, 2005). “With Jesus as Our Connector” The New York Times Magazine

 

 

Overview

In this extensive cover story Mahler details the recent expansion of “second-generation megachurches” into full-blown social centers in America’s fast-growing “exurbs.” Take Surprise, Arizona for example.

 

In 1996 a 36 year-old Lee McFarland left a lucrative job with Microsoft and set out to join a small group of evangelical Christians in an effort to plant a church outside of Phoenix. Surprise was a relatively new community, but growing fast. McFarland was relatively new to Christian ministry, his seminary training limited to correspondence courses. But a house-by-house strategy of publicity and conversations quickly created a foothold that billboards and direct mail soon expanded. The appeal was simple: be personal and practical, not preachy or demanding. What became the 15,000 member “Radiant” church of today started out in an un-airconditioned school auditorium. And the story of its boom has everything to do with a strategic convergence of church style and community desire.

 

Radiant recently designed a new 55,000-square-foot church that looks “more like an overgrown ski lodge than a place of worship.” No steeple, stained-glass, crosses, or images of Jesus. But plasma-screen televisions, cafes, donuts, and Xboxes for the kids abound. Even the baptismal pool is kept at a soothing 101 degrees. “We want the church to look like a mall,” says McFarland, underscoring the emphasis he and his staff place on making the space, and the message, as comfortable as possible for members and guests.

 

This is not the megachurch of the 1980s, says Mahler, a phenomenon in its own right that boomed on a currency of quick low-maintenance services for suburbanites. The difference is not one of size, but of the manner of appeal. Radiant is a church because it is a community center – an emblem of the new megachurches which “operate almost like surrogate governments, offering residents day care, athletic facilities, counseling, even schools.”

 

At the center of this boom, of course, remains a spiritual message that is also simple, direct, and accessible. Jesus is advertised as a personal friend. Committing one’s life to him is as easy as checking a box on a card. Pulpit messages are light on liturgy and heavy on “successful principles for living.” Think Oprah and Dr. Phil crossed with the remnants of a spiritual tradition.

 

Mahler quotes the scholar Alan Wolfe’s observation that “American faith has met American culture – and American culture has triumphed,” and points to Radiant as a case in point. But McFarland’s point of view is not that of a wholesale cultural take-over. The long-term plan remains decidedly Christian.

 

“He says that his hope. . . is that casual worshippers will gradually immerse themselves in Radiant’s many Christ-based programs, from financial-planning to parenthood and education, until they have eventually incorporated Christian values into every aspect of their lives.”

 

Though weekly attendance at most American churches is declining, says Mahler, megachurches continue to expand. The reason for growth is part personal and part demographic. The boom in population and commercial development in Surprise meant a boom in individuals and families seeking a structure around which they could organize their lives in a meaningful way. Churches such as Radiant try to avoid creating a “generation of spectators, religious onlookers” by giving their congregations more tangible points of involvement and life transformation. In some cases, these measures, such as schools, meet a practical need that is not well-served elsewhere in Surprise.

 

Part of the entrepreneurial freedom enjoyed by Radiant stems from its relative institutional independence. It is a part of the Assemblies of God denomination, a Pentecostal movement with conservative doctrines but a willingness to let local churches set their own course toward Christian education. Pastor McFarland shares the denominational doctrines and beliefs, such as the gift of spiritual tongues, but recognizes that “new believers” need time to be comfortably introduced to these principles.

 

Meanwhile, there are skeptics. Says Mahler, “By modeling his church after a mall, McFarland is, deliberately or not, desanctifying it. While his self-helpish sermons clearly resonate with transient exurbanites looking for ways to improve their lives, they can be seen as subverting the real purpose of worship.” Then again, if growth is an indicator of God’s approval, McFarland has a pretty good case to make. For his part, growth is the barometer of all things important: “Churches that have stopped growing have stopped hearing the screams of people being sent to hell.”

 

 

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

 

1.      What is it about McFarland’s church that makes it successful?

 

2.      Is this indeed ‘success’ in the traditional sense of church ministry?

 

3.      What kind of “gospel” seems to be communicated through mega-churches such as this?

 

4.      Do you agree with McFarland’s motivations for church growth?

 

 

Implications:

RadiantChurch

’s aggressive pursuit of relevance is admirable. Genuine needs are bringing congregants through its doors. But when expansive growth is assumed to be a sign of God’s blessing and approval Christians have perhaps confused a cultural ideal with a faith calling. Faith must indeed be relevant to all aspects of life, but that doesn’t mean church-goers must build their lifestyles around a church facility. There are sides of the Christian faith that can never comport with a therapeutic ministry. Self-denial, social justice, willful poverty – these teachings of Jesus are not going to win over the crowds, but remain vital.

 

Christopher S. Yates cCYS