Worship centre
USE YOUR IMAGINATION TO DRAW THE PICTURE...
If you need some help, here are some inspiring articles and pictures...
An online magazine on innovative worship ministry
https://www.barna.com/research/designing-worship-spaces-with-millennials-in-mind/
Many churches today are explicitly constructed not to look and feel too much like a religious place. A stark contrast to the ancient cathedrals and churches of old—the very design of which was intended to help people experience the divine. How does this design shift impact worshipers? What about outsiders? What do church buildings say about the faith of those inside? And, when it comes to the next generation of believers—who, leaders worry, will darken the church doors less and less often—does the building itself have anything to do with their resistance or attraction to the church? To understand the principles of design that best resonate with Millennials, Barna Group partnered with Cornerstone Knowledge Network to conduct a multi-phase research program. First, Barna recruited Millennials from a variety of religious backgrounds to tour urban cathedrals, suburban megachurches, city parks and coffee shops. Along the way Barna’s researchers asked what they did and didn’t like about each space, what they would use different spaces for and how they might change each place if given the opportunity. After observing these Millennials, Barna better understood the scope of issues confronting churches as they work to optimize their buildings for the next generation. The Barna team then developed an online survey for a nationally representative sample of 18- to 29-year-olds. This survey combined word-driven questions with “visual” polling—asking participants to respond to sets of images—for a unique, in-depth look at what types of spaces Millennials resonate with at home, at church and at work. Additionally, the survey sought to uncover Millennials’ perceptions of Christianity beyond the four walls of the church. Finding a Place In this summary, readers can see some of the visual polling from the survey as well as some of the results of the word-comparison poll. These questions focus on the design and aesthetic of church buildings and worship environments. To explore the full scope of the survey—including demographic segmentation, questions on work, home and community, field-test results and insights into how Millennials feel when they visit a church—read the Making Space for Millennials monograph. The first series showed four images of different kinds of worship spaces and asked which respondents found most appealing. Just under half of participants (44%) selected Sanctuary 2, with the remaining respondents split almost evenly among the other three images. Those who profess a faith other than Christianity (32%) were more likely than average (20%) to prefer Sanctuary 3; this image is devoid of Christian symbols. Sanctuary 2 was the “Goldilocks” space for many respondents—not too big, not too small. Just right. It’s big enough to retain some anonymity as a visitor—the marginally churched (63%) and those who are not practicing Christians (50%) preferred it more strongly than the average—but small enough to feel part of a community. Parents with children under 18 (50%) also preferred Sanctuary 2 more than average. This pattern squares with feedback from the field groups: For many, size is a necessary evil rather than a selling point. Participants acknowledged that a successful church would grow and therefore need to increase the size of its services and facilities. But they also expressed a bit of tacit distrust for very large churches. One young man put it starkly: “It seems like a really big business.” Millennials express that their perceived advantage of a large church is the option to blend in, especially for those who are less comfortable visiting for the first time. The second series of images showed four different altar areas with varying levels of ornamentation and iconography. Altars 2 (33%) and 3 (37%) were the overall favorites. Both are unambiguously Christian and are more traditional in appearance than image 4. Analysis of faith and demographic segments reveals a few interesting trends. Nearly half of non-mainline Protestants (48%) preferred Altar 2, with an even stronger preference among evangelicals (55%). By contrast, Catholics (63%) were more likely than average to prefer Altar 3. Half of those professing a faith other than Christianity (51%) found Altar 1 most appealing—it lacks overt Christian iconography—and three in 10 of those with no faith (29%) also chose Altar 1. Both these proportions were much higher than the average (19%). Looking at ethnic, age and other demographics, Barna found that Hispanic participants strongly preferred Altar 3 (54%), while twice as many blacks (21%) as the national average (11%) found Altar 4 appealing. There seem to be significant regional differences, as well. Midwesterners were more likely to prefer Altar 2 (40%) and Southerners more likely to choose 3 (46%). Married people (30%) and adults ages 25 to 29 (25%) were more likely than average to find Altar 1 appealing. These patterns illustrate most Millennials’ overall preference for a straightforward, overtly Christian style of imagery—as long as it doesn’t look too institutional or corporate. Not only do such settings physically direct one’s attention to the divine, they also provide a rich context of church history as the backdrop for worship. The third series of images showed four images of nature brought into or around the church space. Most Millennials preferred images with greater realism and more immersion into the outdoors. Nature 4, the garden path, was the favorite by far, with 62% choosing it as most appealing; a majority in nearly every population segment preferred it. Catholics (74%), those with no faith (70%) and the unchurched (67%) were even more likely than average to choose 4. While just 9% of all adults chose Nature 1—the more child-oriented paper cutout of a tree—one-quarter of evangelicals (24%) and about one in six born-again Christians (17%) found it most appealing. The final series of pictures showed four different images of church windows. Windows 1 and 4 tied as most appealing, with both garnering 35% of participants’ votes. This is a drastic split; 1 is the most modern, least “churchy” of the images, while 4 is the most ornate and traditional. These survey results are consistent with the field group findings: Millennials like both! During the field test, participants saw a space with both styles of windows in Church of the Redeemer in downtown Atlanta. It has a small prayer chapel with an ornate stained glass image of Jesus at the front, flanked by two large, open windows. The overall effect is pleasing, and was noticed with appreciation by field participants. Middle-class young adults were more likely (45%) than average to prefer Window 1, as were Midwesterners (41%). This was also the case, by a wide margin, with those adhering to non-Christian faiths (61%). On the other side, Catholics (55%), residents of the West (44%) and Hispanics (44%) were all more likely than average to find Window 4 most appealing. (There is likely significant crossover among these three segments.) The research also posed a wide range of questions about Millennials perceptions of churches, church buildings and worship environments. When asked to choose between contrasting words to describe their vision of the ideal church, a majority of Millennials chose the following (for more word pairing choices, see the full report): • Community, 78% was selected over privacy, 22% • Sanctuary, 77% (auditorium, 23%) • Classic, 67% (trendy, 33%) • Quiet, 65% (loud, 35%) • Casual, 64% (dignified, 36%) • Modern, 60% (traditional, 40%) While “Sanctuary,” “classic” and “quiet” are more often associated with traditional church buildings, less than half of survey respondents preferred the word “traditional” over “modern.” And herein lies a cognitive dissonance common to the young adults interviewed in the survey. Many of them aspire to a more traditional church experience, in a beautiful building steeped in history and religious symbolism, but they are more at ease in a modern space that feels more familiar than mysterious. https://www.worshipfacilities.com/spaces/5-trends-defining-church-youth-and-children-s-spaces
Innovative church ministries that are impacting families through their youth and children's facilities and programs.Growing churches know that youth and children's spaces can be among the most challenging when it comes to providing high-function while balancing budget. Here are five trends to help inspire you as you maximize the facilities that serve your younger congregation. 1. CONNECTING YOUTH SPACE TO THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH. "We’re seeing churches that are intentionally seeking to address inter-generational ministry move away from an age-segregated youth empire' at the church to a smaller youth hangout' that may be off the narthex but can be open to it," shares Steve Fridsma, principal architect at Elevate Studio in Grand Rapids, MI. For InSpirit Church in Byron Center, MI, the youth space opens to the main lobby via a big aluminum garage door. On many Sunday mornings, it is intentionally open to make the youth more part of the life of the church. "The design is still a casual youth-friendly space," points out Fridsma, "but people flow in and out so that it isn’t youth only. Not only does this help with multi-generationalism on Sunday morning but it has been good for stewardship because it required less square footage overall. " At Centerpoint Church in Murrieta, CA, Visioneering Studios helped the church craft two gym size buildingsone for high school and junior highwith large roll up doors that merge into a common outdoor connection space which is the heart of the campus. Bob Bergmann, director of design for Visioneering Studios in Irvine, CA describes, "It was important to the church that the space was just considered a venue and not labeled for youth. They are on purpose a little more youthful spacesvery durable, easy to clean and maintain, but community groups can also use the area." 2. RECLAIMING UNDERUTILIZED AREAS TO GROW CAPACITYIt can be difficult to envision space as anything except what it is already used for when you see it every day, but the fresh eyes of a designer can make a big difference when it comes to redefining the use of a space. Eastview Christian Church in Normal, IL and BLDD Architects recrafted a two-story high gym to give it a "House of Blues" feel that would appeal to both the youth and adults. "On Sunday mornings, the youth service includes about 300 high school kids, but it is a great auditorium for multiple functions," shares Jason Smith, family pastor at Eastview Christian. "There are bricks and old pews. Lots of pallet wood that creates a cloud for lights. No one feels far from the stage—even on the mezzanine. This venue has become a very popular wedding spot in our church. It gives a small church feel in the middle of a big church. We have adult service in this space at 9:00 in the morning followed by a high school service at 11:00." 3. APPLYING DESIGN THINKING TO BREAKOUT SPACES Breakout spaces are often the place where there is limited design. A table and chairs, then call it a day. But recent trends are giving more thought to these spaces. At Eastview Christian in Normal, IL, the PreK-1st Graders spend half of the morning in small groups and the other half in large groups. BLDD Architects created small group space for first graders with an innovative application of graphic and interior design to cue children where to go. The dividers create podseach with large graphics that are easyto identify without having to read. There is a green library. A blue police station. The children sit on colorful circles on the floor and stay in consistent groups. Each pod has a whiteboard and the ability to hang things integrated into the design. "We can have over 400 PreK-1st graders on a Sunday morning," shares Jason Smith, family pastor at Eastview Christian. "The kids travel with a consistent small group of 5-8. It has been a great space. These pods allow us to optimize small groups in a compact area." At the First Church of Zeeland, Elevate Studio used low walls and a variety of different types of furnishings to create varied breakout spaces for conversations. This makes the spaces effective on Sunday mornings, but also creates support for different uses throughout the week. 4. RECRAFTING CIRCULATION"Many Children’s ministries are stuck in outdated facilities that often utilize the double loaded classroom model. In addition to contributing to an institutional environment that looks and feels like school or a hospital, the corridor often requires 20-25 percent of the total building area to accomplish, just for a hallway. We prefer to reconfigure that square footage from a linear hallway into an area for large groups, surrounded by smaller breakout areas," shares Stephen Pickard, director of Church Works at GFF in Dallas, TX. At the First Baptist Church of Garland, TX, GFF led a small renovation replacing a masonry wall with storefront that created transparency from the main church to the children's ministry. The doors to the classrooms were also replaced with glass to open the views. For other churches, like Central Baptist Church in College Station, TX, a renovation can help bring a children's ministry that is located into disparate parts of the church into a single locationwhich is a big win for security and making it easy for parents to pick up and drop off children. 5. CREATING SOMETHING FOR YOUTH AND CHILDREN OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH. "We knew we couldn't reach the youth in our community if we didn't have dedicated space for them," shares Jason Ray, pastor of operations at Saint Mark Baptist in Little Rock, AR. "During the process, we researched and looked into ways we could help the youth in our community. We started developing new programs and partnering with existing programs that could be housed in our space. " Saint Mark found the need to help youths was high in their immediate area. They also found a close by elementary school that was failing. "We launched an after school program for children from that school along with 21 other schools utilizing Little Rock school buses and our six busses to get students from across the city. Parents would come in with a long list of problems their kids had in school. Within weeks, those same parents would come in and say, I don't know what you guys are doing, but things have changed drastically.'" It turns out Saint Mark was meeting basic needs and spending time with the kids. "In our research to see what programs we could house," highlights Ray, "we found that many kids have home situations that make it hard to focus. The first day of the program, a kindergartner cried from 2:30 until 5:15 until we got down to the dinner hall. We realized she was hungry. She ate her food and asked for more. Another child asked if he could take some home for his brother." Saint Mark's program found kids who didn't have beds or dressers, so they mobilized to meet threse basic physical needsincluding a Christmas gift program where families in the church went above and beyond showering kids with gifts. The church's new children and youth space is used every day with hundreds of kids going in and out and the city has put the church in its youth plan because of the impact. "When kids and youth see that people actually care, it makes all the difference. Hope is powerful. https://www.davidsantistevan.com/innovative/
I like to be different. Unique. Memorable. As a worship leader, I balance this tension almost every day. Every time I innovate and create in the context of corporate worship, I’m faced with resistance. I wonder if it’s possible to be too creative, too innovative for our own good. Why? Two reasons: 1. The purpose of corporate worship isn’t musical innovation. Quite honestly it’s not about music at all. Music is simply a vehicle to experience God. 2. A large percentage of people don’t really care. They may not like music or my style of music, so is it worth it? The musician in me wants to create. I want time to innovate. I want to experiment with new instruments, new sounds. But how innovative is too innovative? When does it become a distraction? Great Music Isn’t EnoughWhen I first started leading worship, innovation was everything to me. I wasn’t concerned with what the congregation needed or if they were engaged in worship. I mistakenly thought that great music was enough. I now know that it is not. I’m there to serve – to blaze a trail for people to meet with their Maker. In order for that to happen, worship leader, you need to be invisible. You need to become desperate for your people to see and experience Jesus. You see, I wonder if our desire for musical innovation is trumping our need to be pastoral – to serve our people where they are and facilitate their encounter with God. I wonder if we’re making worship all about us – a place to shine, a career to advance in. But we can create the most innovative music this world has ever seen and miss the point. We could create music that even Michael Gungor loves and still not be faithful to our calling. So let’s discuss. How do we balance musical innovation and corporate singing? When does the music become the focus in people’s minds? http://micahcobb.com/blog/c-s-lewis-on-worship-innovations/
Every minister and most church members have experienced one tension in worship. The tension is between member preferences. Some members want changes and innovations in worship; others enjoy the current worship and are opposed to any changes. In many churches and among younger Christians (remember: I work with college students), the default position is that innovation and change is a must. Many ministries operate out of an assumption that if anything stays the same for a couple of years, people will not be engaged. Churches should not make the opposite mistake, though, and think that change is bad. We should aim to make our church practices relevant to the culture around us. But relevant does not mean trendy. We must realize that change and innovation is not always a positive. And this is where some comments by C. S. Lewis have been helpful for me. In the first chapter of Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer, C. S. Lewis discusses why he thinks worship innovations are ill-advised. His comments, I think, should be viewed as warnings rather than rules, but we should think about what he has to say. (Lewis’s comments refer to whether the Anglican Church should update its liturgy and prayer book, so he is talking about “high-church” worship rather than “low-church” worship style. His points, however, apply to all worship styles.) Changing the Worship StyleOn ministers’ desire to change the church’s worship style, he says: It looks as if they [Anglican clergy] believed people can be lured to go to church by incessant brightenings, lightenings, lengthenings, abridgements, simplications, and complications of the service. (4) Lewis does not explain why he thinks it is wrong or unwise to change the service to attract people to it. I wish he would have said more on this point, because people often justify a change in worship by claiming it will attract more people. Lewis might think that these changes do not in fact attract people. But he might also think that, even if the changes do attract people, it is wrong to change things for that reason. The Entertainment MotiveOn the entertainment motive: Novelty, simply as such, can have only an entertainment value. And they [the laity] don’t go to church to be entertained. They go to use the service, or, if you prefer, to enact it. (4) On the Effect of Newness in WorshipOn what novelty tends to do to the worshipper’s attention and focus: It fixes our attention on the service itself; and thinking about worship is a different thing from worshipping….A still worse thing may happen. Novelty may fix our attention not even on the service but on the celebrant [that is, the priest]….There is really some excuse for the man who said, “I wish they’d remember that the charge to Peter was Feed my sheep; not Try experiments on my rats, or even, Teach my performing dogs new tricks.” (5) Of course, I don’t think that Lewis’ comments should lead us to fear change. Mere novelty should not be introduced into worship for the love of change, but mere traditions should not be enshrined in worship for the fear of change. |