Coffee in Church
Over my years of ministry, I have often found myself between two groups of sincere, committed Christians—one wanting to change a church practice that the other wants preserved. Everything from paint colors to pulpit or no pulpit, from how to run VBS to whether or not beverages should be permitted in the sanctuary.
I have found that the greatest obstacle to effectively navigating these questions is the emotional investment that people have in their side of the issue. We all claim to want to follow Scripture, but most things that people disagree about in our churches are NOT direct commands from God’s Word, but rather man-made traditions.
Traditions are often born as symbols to represent beliefs, so much so that the symbol becomes the public expression of the belief. For example, in early America respectable men wore knee-breeches, stockings, and buckled shoes. Long trousers were the apparel of ruffians—sailors, frontiersmen, and the poor. The French Revolution changed all that. French revolutionaries called themselves sans-culottes (“without breeches”) because they rejected the nobility and showed it by rejecting aristocratic dress. Long trousers became a symbol of the common man and republican virtue; knee-breeches weren’t just “old-fashioned”; they expressed scorn for the working man.
The same thing happens in churches. Traditions are created to represent beliefs, and then the tradition becomes the belief. But over time, the perceptions of people change and that often changes perceptions of the meaning of the traditions.
For example, one long-standing tradition was that the church building is a sanctuary, i.e. a holy place. God is there and so we don’t use the church building for common things. Special behaviors are required in the church e.g. reverent silence, no food or drink, no playing of sports or other common diversions, and so on. Many people have grown up with that idea of “church”.
The Protestant Reformation (1500s) refocused the definition of “the church”. The church, the reformers said, was not the building but the people of the congregation. Initially, the church building retained the sense of “holy place”, but as Protestantism grew more aggressively evangelistic, use for mission surpassed the importance of the church building’s holy status. Churches built food pantries for the poor and social halls for fellowship gatherings and gymnasiums for youth activities—and not without much now-forgotten argument and consternation! The traditions were reformed and those reforms have become our traditions.
When I became a pastor in the 1980’s, traditions were shifting again. Keeping costs down led to the “sanctuary” being constructed as a “multipurpose room”. On Saturday it may house a youth concert or wedding reception (common use), on Sunday a worshiping congregation (sacred use). If it’s multipurpose, and if some of the purposes are common, then technically, it’s no longer a sanctuary.
When we constructed a new building in 2003, we designed the “sanctuary” as a multipurpose room. But some people saw it as (and called it) “the sanctuary”—a sacred term. Others called it “the auditorium”—a secular or common term.
That may seem like a small distinction, but how you speak about a thing reveals how you think about it. If you’re thinking of it as an auditorium, a multipurpose room and not as a holy space, why not bring a beverage into it while you listen to a sermon?
And this is where the two sides approach me and ask me to adjudicate the matter.
In one ear I hear:
…“Is this God’s house or a cafeteria?”
…and “Doesn’t the Bible say that we have houses to eat and drink in?”
…and “Why can’t people respect God’s house and just drink their coffee before they come to church?”
…and “People are going to spill on the church fabric and the stains will ruin the chairs. Don’t you care about that?”
And in the other ear I hear:
…“I don’t understand—we can drink beverages in the auditorium at a wedding reception on Saturday but not in the church service on Sunday?” …and “What’s the harm of bringing a beverage into the service?”
…and “Other Bible-preaching churches allow coffee in the service? Why wouldn’t we?”
…and “Does the Bible say we can’t bring a beverage into the church service?”
When confronted with this, I chose to allow people to bring beverages into the church. In next week’s blog, I will explain how I arrived at that decision.
I have found that the greatest obstacle to effectively navigating these questions is the emotional investment that people have in their side of the issue. We all claim to want to follow Scripture, but most things that people disagree about in our churches are NOT direct commands from God’s Word, but rather man-made traditions.
Traditions are often born as symbols to represent beliefs, so much so that the symbol becomes the public expression of the belief. For example, in early America respectable men wore knee-breeches, stockings, and buckled shoes. Long trousers were the apparel of ruffians—sailors, frontiersmen, and the poor. The French Revolution changed all that. French revolutionaries called themselves sans-culottes (“without breeches”) because they rejected the nobility and showed it by rejecting aristocratic dress. Long trousers became a symbol of the common man and republican virtue; knee-breeches weren’t just “old-fashioned”; they expressed scorn for the working man.
The same thing happens in churches. Traditions are created to represent beliefs, and then the tradition becomes the belief. But over time, the perceptions of people change and that often changes perceptions of the meaning of the traditions.
For example, one long-standing tradition was that the church building is a sanctuary, i.e. a holy place. God is there and so we don’t use the church building for common things. Special behaviors are required in the church e.g. reverent silence, no food or drink, no playing of sports or other common diversions, and so on. Many people have grown up with that idea of “church”.
The Protestant Reformation (1500s) refocused the definition of “the church”. The church, the reformers said, was not the building but the people of the congregation. Initially, the church building retained the sense of “holy place”, but as Protestantism grew more aggressively evangelistic, use for mission surpassed the importance of the church building’s holy status. Churches built food pantries for the poor and social halls for fellowship gatherings and gymnasiums for youth activities—and not without much now-forgotten argument and consternation! The traditions were reformed and those reforms have become our traditions.
When I became a pastor in the 1980’s, traditions were shifting again. Keeping costs down led to the “sanctuary” being constructed as a “multipurpose room”. On Saturday it may house a youth concert or wedding reception (common use), on Sunday a worshiping congregation (sacred use). If it’s multipurpose, and if some of the purposes are common, then technically, it’s no longer a sanctuary.
When we constructed a new building in 2003, we designed the “sanctuary” as a multipurpose room. But some people saw it as (and called it) “the sanctuary”—a sacred term. Others called it “the auditorium”—a secular or common term.
That may seem like a small distinction, but how you speak about a thing reveals how you think about it. If you’re thinking of it as an auditorium, a multipurpose room and not as a holy space, why not bring a beverage into it while you listen to a sermon?
And this is where the two sides approach me and ask me to adjudicate the matter.
In one ear I hear:
…“Is this God’s house or a cafeteria?”
…and “Doesn’t the Bible say that we have houses to eat and drink in?”
…and “Why can’t people respect God’s house and just drink their coffee before they come to church?”
…and “People are going to spill on the church fabric and the stains will ruin the chairs. Don’t you care about that?”
And in the other ear I hear:
…“I don’t understand—we can drink beverages in the auditorium at a wedding reception on Saturday but not in the church service on Sunday?” …and “What’s the harm of bringing a beverage into the service?”
…and “Other Bible-preaching churches allow coffee in the service? Why wouldn’t we?”
…and “Does the Bible say we can’t bring a beverage into the church service?”
When confronted with this, I chose to allow people to bring beverages into the church. In next week’s blog, I will explain how I arrived at that decision.