Missional Construction?
What the building preferences of the unchurched mean, and don’t mean.
People who don’t go to church may be turned off by a recent trend toward more utilitarian church buildings. By a nearly 2-to-1 ratio over any other option, unchurched Americans prefer churches that look more like a medieval cathedral than what most think of as a more contemporary church building.
The findings come from a recent survey conducted by LifeWay Research for the Cornerstone Knowledge Network (CKN), a group of church-focused facilities development firms. The online survey included 1,684 unchurched adults—defined as those who had not attended a church, mosque or synagogue in the past six months except for religious holidays or special events.
"Despite billions being spent on church buildings, there was an overall decline in church attendance in the 1990s," according to Jim Couchenour, director of marketing and ministry services for Cogun, Inc., a founding member of CKN. "This led CKN to ask, ‘As church builders, what can we do to help church leaders be more intentional about reaching people who don’t go to church?’"
Ed Stetzer suggested that the unchurched may prefer the more aesthetically pleasing look of the Gothic cathedral because it speaks to a connectedness to the past. Young unchurched people were particularly drawn to the Gothic look.
Stetzer noted that despite these survey results, most of the churches that look like a cathedral are in decline. Just because someone has a preference for the aesthetically pleasing, Gothic churches doesn’t mean they’ll visit the church if that’s the only connection point they have to the congregation, he said.
"Buildings don’t reach people, people do," Stetzer said.
This post originally appeared on a blog operated by editorial advisor Ed Stetzer. It is an excerpt of an article, which can be accessed here.
| Share this: |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Tags used in this post:
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.christianitytoday.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1182
Comments
Many people prefer more classic architecture. But that doesn't mean that is where they go shop, eat or buy a house. So why should it mean that is where they will go to church. What matters to a church is the people that go to it, like what Stetzer said. That doesn't mean we should only build ugly churches. But clearly it doesn't mean that we should put our money into re-creating the Cathedrals of Europe either. This just sounds like it was put together by a bunch of church facility construction consultants. Oh wait, the survey was put together by a bunch of church facility construction consultants! Surely that didn't have anything to do with the results.
Posted by: Adam S | May 14, 2008 11:27 AM
At least we're beginning to talk about aesthetics. I like the traditional structure, but I believe that what really defines "missional" will be the way that our buildings, outreach, and lifestyles, play out over time, not just in one area.
Posted by: Alan | May 14, 2008 12:26 PM
It may be true that unchurched people tend to like the more traditional buildings, but that doesn't answer, "Where will they actually attend a church?" This article should give those who are building a new building pause, but what actually moves an unchurched person to attend a church. It seems research is always showing that someone will come to church primarily because they were invited. So if we are an inviting church or a church that touches a community in a special way, it won't matter as much what our building looks like. In the Summer 07 Leadership Magazine Kevin Ford talked about building buildings that are in line with your church DNA (Cracking the Code). Rather than asking the question, "What would an unchurched person like," we should work toward being authentic to our DNA, create an inviting atmosphere, then invite and serve like crazy.
Posted by: David Thorne | May 20, 2008 3:33 PM