"Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment" (John 7:24)

Recently I read in a church bulletin two paragraphs about losing our young people; the statement was made that various religious denominations were the first "to use recreation, banquets, and games to try to retain their young people." Probably that statement is true; one might as well add that denominations were first to hire youth ministers in order to keep their young people. But the question should be asked, "Is there anything unscriptural about any one of these things?" Is it wrong, in other words, for young people to enjoy recreational activities together, such as bowling or miniature golf? Does having a banquet violate a Scriptural principle? (Adults have been known to have Sweetheart Banquets in February; are we trying to save our older members when such an event occurs?) What sin is it if young people play board games or Taboo together? Can a congregation not choose to ask someone to work predominantly with the young people?

The only thing that would be wrong with these activities would be if they received the main or an equal emphasis to such spiritual concerns as Bible study, service, and evangelism. Two of the main purposes of the church are evangelism and edification. We ought to be involved in whatever causes growth. Surely brethren recognize that playing basketball will not achieve that end. Eating meals together will not necessarily bring spiritual growth, either, but it does furnish an opportunity to talk about spiritual matters and to be together.

For approximately four years South Seminole hosted youth meetings every Saturday evening. For various reasons, they are now more frequent during the holidays and the summer than throughout the school year. Each meeting was about two hours. We shared a meal, had a 20 to 30-minute message, sang for half an hour, and if there was time, we played a game. Members often provided the food. Although occasionally we met in someone's home (or a park), we usually met at the building.

Of all of those who attended regularly, we have only lost one (temporarily). One was our youth leader the past three summers. Two others are attending a Christian university, and the remainder are attending college locally and are still a valuable part of the congregation here. Although there were obviously some social elements involved, the primary emphasis has always been a spiritual one. At the current time, on some Sunday or Wednesday evenings, the young people, after worship, remove themselves to a room and sing hymns for 20 minutes or so. They do this on their own.

In other words, a congregation of the Lord's church can combine a few social aspects of their lives with the predominantly spiritual ones in such a way that all profit. However, if the social activities replace or minimize the spiritual, such programs will usually fail. The original criticism, therefore, of "recreation, banquets, and games" does not appear to be valid.

A Second Criticism

The first criticism was followed by a second one, in which it was lamented that brethren borrowed other things from denominations: "fellowship halls, banquet rooms, gymnasiums, and kitchens." A banquet room sounds more appropriate to the description of a hotel rather than a church building. Not many congregations can afford such an extravagance. Usually a fellowship hall serves as a "banquet room"; so the two refer to the same thing. Admittedly, a gymnasium appears to have no spiritual emphasis and is designed solely for social activities. Brethren ought to wonder what the value of such a huge expenditure is. Ostensibly, the purpose for sporting activities is to serve as a way to draw non-Christians. Undoubtedly, a few have actually been converted, but it was not from playing volleyball. Who would like to assert that a gymnasium has brought dozens, let alone hundreds, to the Lord? The whole design is social rather than spiritual.

But what about the kitchen and the (usually-adjoining) fellowship hall? Each congregation must determine whether they can justify the expense for these. But the same can be said for the purchasing or construction of any building. The authors of Pagan Christianity (reviewed previously) claimed that any church building was not worth the expense. One could quibble that offices, a copy machine, or a secretary are frivolous expenses. How about spending several thousand dollars a year on insurance and several more on maintenance? Besides maintaining a parking lot, air conditioners are expensive to replace. Plumbing and electrical problems will also cut into the budget. It would be just as valid to complain about all of these as it is to accuse a congregation of being wasteful for having a kitchen and fellowship hall.

In other words, how one congregation chooses to spend the contributions received is a matter of judgment—not necessarily Scriptural. The difference in cost between having a building or not is far greater than whether to include two rooms within a building being constructed. Raising the "expense" objection might have registered with some 50 years ago, but a realistic look at what churches spend on various items these days renders it invalid. If a congregation chooses to construct a new building today, they are not obligated to include a kitchen or a fellowship hall—or heating and air conditioning. But they should not criticize those who do, since it is a matter of judgment and autonomy.

Let us further consider, however, is a fellowship hall a wasteful expense? It would be difficult to make such a case, since it is frequently one of the most used parts of the building. The main room in which the church assembles is used, perhaps, three to four hours a week. The classrooms are used even less. The office area is the most used part of the building (40 to 50 hours a week).

The fellowship hall serves as a multi-purpose room, which includes being a place where we have potlucks. This congregation schedules several of them each year. When a missionary comes to speak, we often have a potluck afterward so that brethren can visit with him and his family. Visitors are invited to stay and share a meal with us on other occasions. Group meetings such as men's breakfasts occur there, as well as various Ladies' programs. The seniors meet once a month on a Thursday evening for a meal. The college students stay after worship on certain Sunday evenings. And the youth meetings also take place there. At funerals or memorial services, the families are often grateful that we are able to provide food for those who come to support the family.

The room also serves as a meeting place for non-eating events. We are able to conduct two major classes at one time during Vacation Bible School—prior to the room being used for lunch. We hold special men's and women's classes in it, and it provides ample space for our monthly bulletin mail-outs.

Despite all of the practical value that this room possesses, someone might still say, "Well, I still think it's a frivolous expense, and I'm not in favor of it." Fine; then don't build a building with such a room in it. But have the graciousness to allow others to do so if they wish without condemning them for doing so. We can all agree to disagree on matters of judgment without it affecting our fellowship. On matters of doctrine, we must all remain firm. But having a fellowship hall or a kitchen in a place where we meet for worship is not a matter of doctrine, since in the first century brethren did not appear to even own buildings.

EATING IN THE CHURCH BUILDING

Someone might voice the objection that they feel uncomfortable about eating in the same locale as where they just offered up worship to God. Certainly, brethren would not encourage anyone to violate their conscience, but some important facts ought to be considered. In the New Testament, Paul himself ate food in the same place where worship had just been conducted (Acts 20:7-11). Jesus fed the multitude in the same location He had just taught them for three days (Mark 8:1-9). Even those who oppose eating in a church building, when they meet for worship in their house, eat meals in the same location. For more information on this subject, please read the next article.

The décor, seating arrangements, style of, how many rooms there will be, and what they will be used for in buildings that are constructed for us to meet in for worship are all matters of judgment. Eating a meal in the place where we meet does not qualify as a sin or violate any principle of authority—unless a common meal is confused with the Lord's supper. Therefore, in such matters of judgment liberty ought to prevail.