That announcement, or one like it, showed up in many church bulletins; particularly, those within the media markets of New Orleans and Indianapolis. The idea was to provide a better environment for Super Bowl parties than those which people could have in their own home. Churches would cancel worship services, prayer services, and Bible study; offering in their place an evening of "fun and fellowship" meant to draw new people into the church, or to be exposed to the church.

Was this a great way to get people involved or a movement toward more worldly churches? Is this an appropriate methodology for the church to reach people? No matter which side you stand on this issue, the intent here is not to debate the merits of a church hosting a "Super Bowl Party"; rather, it is to, hopefully, cause us to consider whether we are being influencers of the world, or the world is influencing us.

Are our churches doing the job Christ intended for us; or, have we slowly given in and allowed the world to guide our hearts, minds, and activities? Put another way, who is having the greater influence on the other; the church on the culture, or the culture on the Church?

I was raised as part of the church during the '60s and 70's and I do not remember our church ever changing its schedule to accommodate anything the secular world was doing. We didn't cancel church services due to bowl games, "March Madness", final fours, the World Series, Olympics, or, even, NASCAR. In fact, canceling church for some such event would not even have been brought up for consideration.

That's just the way it was. It is not so today.

I should also point out that the culture of sports was not nearly as prevalent as it is today. In fact, some of those events weren't even televised. Unlike today, sports did not try to compete with the traditional Sunday morning worship time. For example, television coverage for the Daytona 500, the inaugural event of the NASCAR season, and considered racing's "Super Bowl", began in the afternoon. Today, one faces the dilemma of choosing between this event and the church services scheduled at the same time. (Thank you lord for DVR's, so I could catch this year's race which began during church services.)

Today, major sporting events and media do not even take church services into consideration when scheduling As an aside, this has filtered down into our junior sports leagues where youth games are commonly scheduled against church services, forcing parents to increasingly choose between the two.

As a lay leader in a local Church, I was privy to a few of those 'decision making' meetings concerning Church services and sporting events. Unfortunately, it seemed the discussions often centered on whether or not one's team was still in the game. For example, a discussion about the NCAA men's basketball tournament might include:

"Should we hold church services Sunday night? March Madness is

should it?

From such discussions arose a seemingly logical alternative, "We can do both". Don't cancel the Sunday evening church meeting but change it to a Super Bowl party and invite all our non-church friends - make it an "outreach" effort. "It can be a chance to evangelize", they rationalize, "And to show our friends that it is okay to have fun." In other words, we can have our cake - literally - and eat it too.

As the big day arrives, everyone gathers around the newly purchased big screen, high definition, Dolby surround sound, flat screen TV. Drinks are poured-cokes and iced tea of course-the dip and dogs are passed around, and talk centers on the $3 million ads placed by companies that are confident their dollars are well spent because they realize what a wonderfully persuasive medium television can be.

As the friendly chatter continues, a commercial by a website domain provider airs and offers viewers an opportunity to buy their own website domain like, "Smokinhotgirls.com". Intended to target the young male demographic, it naturally stars "smoking hot girls" as it pitch persons. Then comes the you-need-a-new-job, "casual Friday" advertisement with the obligatory, scantily attired men and women showing how much "fun" their jobs are..

And let's not forget the beer ads. As usual, they are observed to be, "Really good this year". They offer funny story lines, cute animals, and a sense of belonging to all who have a "cold one" in their hand, while implying viewers should go ahead and "live it up". After all, you only go around once in life.

You get the picture. In fact, you probably saw them yourself. Are such messages consistent with that of the church? Isn't it odd that the ad creating the most controversy was one that celebrated the value of life?

In the ad, former Heisman Trophy winner, and outspoken Christian athlete, Tim Tebow and his mom shared her decision to carry him to full term even though doctors had warned her that doing so could cost her life. The tough call she made, in choosing to give life to her son, may one day lead to our seeing him in the Super Bowl; if not, following his parents as a Christian missionary. Is there any doubt the decision she made has had a positive impacted on many, many, lives?

Putting the commercials aside, the game was extremely exciting to watch. (Yes, I watched it; how can you pull against a team called "the Saints", with the slogan, "Who dat!" - short for, "Who dat gonna beat dem Saints!"?) Even the most casual of fans would have to admit this was a great game. However, as exciting as it was, my fear is many of the unchurched participating in church Super Bowl parties left thinking, "What's the difference, less beer?"

Perhaps as they left their thoughts were more along the lines of the song-title, "Won't Get Fooled Again", sung during the halftime show by, much-celebrated, 1960s-80s British rock group, "The Who". Yes, as has been duly noted, the band looked quite old singing their hits such as "Teenage Wastelands" and "Pinball Wizard". However, one song, "Who Are You", raises a poignant life-question to consider.

It is a question for the Church concerning itself - Who are you, church? It is a question for every individual followers of Christ - Who are you?

Are we simply posing as the world under the pretense of trying to reach the world, but without effect? Or, are we so wrapped in the traditions of the past and/or our own "self-holiness" that we have ceased to be relevant in the culture?

Without question, it is crucial that we rethink our strategies and methodologies of reaching out to make a difference in our communities. Doing church the way it was done in 1950 may indeed not work; but, as we try new approaches, we must be careful that we do not also compromise the message. The message must not change. The way it is delivered must continue to evolve.

If a big screen TV, exciting kids programs, and the right kind of music brings people into churches and keeps them interested do we classify this as a success? I guess that really depends on how we define success.

Bigger TV's, better programs, and more fun probably will keep them coming back. However, if they are not being confronted with their need for Christ - if there is no consistent presentation of the gospel and mentoring through the programming we utilize, can we truly say that we are being faithful to our calling as the Church?

If the presentation of the gospel and sound teaching are missing what type of people will we have? Most likely, such a church will be devoid of the real growth and maturity needed to impact our society, rather than the other way around.

At this point, the argument might be made that without good programs people will not come back to church. That may very well be true, but programming must not become a substitute for sound biblical teaching, and more importantly, the presentation of Christ and the empowering work of the Holy Spirit. Perhaps, we need to look afresh at what brings people to Christ.

Please do not misunderstand me. I realize that three hymns sung without musical accompaniment along with a two hour sermon spoken in monotone could push people away from the church today. However, such has not always been the case. In fact, that approach worked quite well in America 250 years ago. Research Jonathan Edwards and the Great Awakening and read his sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" and you will see just how far we have moved from our founding father's intentions of putting God first, not first, and ten.

So, while our approach may need to look vastly different from that of Jonathan Edwards, the gospel, the biblical truth we are to offer is the same. Sure, we can package it in "fun". However, if Sunday has simply become "Fun"-day, then we have missed the mark.

Why do people come to your church? What types of people are there? Why are they there? Is their desire to learn and grow? Are they eager to study the Word? Or, is it just another place to be seen; an opportunity to check off the "spirituality" box of one's life - "Attended church this week"?

Let's get real personal, what or who is the driving force behind your church? The answer to that question will give us keen insight as to our motivations in service. For, it is not only our methodologies that should be examined but our motivations for implementing those particular methods.

The test for ministry is not, necessarily, how many trees we can get in the field; but how much fruit are we actually gathering. The imperative is not so much about how to attract the fruit to harvest it? Jesus actually answered that question when he said "...Open your eyes and look at the fields! They are ripe for harvest." (John 4:35b) Therein is our mission. In it we should find our motivation.

So, who or what motivates you? Dare I ask it, "Who Dat?"