Crossroads Christian Church (second visit)

"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in." That is probably the wrong phrase to have ping-ponging through my head as I write a review of a church, but somehow it seems oddly appropriate. I've spent previous weeks writing about my thoughts on baptism, tithing, megachurches, and nearly everything I'm about to go over again today. But I don't really have much of a choice. After my initial review of Crossroads, a friend whose opinion I respect suggested that a single visit to the church was insufficient. She made me pledge to revisit another time. Today was that time. Forgive any redundancy in what you're about to read, but I think you'll agree I have still managed to offer a fresh approach on things.

My initial plan was to focus entirely on the positive, but to do so would be unfair to the other churches I attend. I will, however, try to emphasize some positives right up front. First, the praise band did one Christmas song, and it sounded really good. One cannot help but wonder why, at the start of the Advent season, the praise band chose not to play more Christmas songs, because the one they played really seemed to energize the congregation.

In my previous visit, I was highly critical of the associate pastor nonchalantly referring to the sacrament of Holy Communion as "bread and juice." Today, however, he seemed to approach the subject more earnestly, and really seemed to encourage all in attendance to do the same. Whatever motivated him to do so, I commend him for doing it.

I chose to approach my Crossroads experience as I saw others behave in my prior visit. To do as the Romans do, so to speak. I didn't dress up, I brought my Vitamin Water inside with me, and I kept my iPhone ready to look up the myriad of Bible verses that were sure to come. Due to congestion on Ontario, I even arrived fashionably late; though that was unintentional on my part, that does seem to be accepted behavior. I sat towards the back, on an aisle, in the dimly lit auditorium. When it came time for the "passing of the peace," I warmly shook hands and greeted people. I smiled and nodded through the much improved Holy Communion blessing, and I passed the KFC bucket down the aisle when it came time for the offering. I admired the bits of the stage that had been wrapped with garland and red ribbon and lights. For the first 30 minutes or so, my friend who wanted me to return would have been proud of me. I rolled with it, accepting that while the style and structure was not to my liking, others seemed to take comfort in it.

It was announced that the focus of the sermons for the next several weeks would not be the New or Old Testaments, but on a book called "The Blessed Life" by writer Robert Morris, also the head of a megachurch. And while some would automatically jump to the conclusion that, because it is new and nontraditional, I would be against it, I'm actually fine with the concept of modern literature incorporated into Christianity. I'm critical that Christians seem to be mostly convinced that the last divinely inspired words were written 2,000 years ago. I've found some modern writers and thinkers whom I feel have been touched by God, inasmuch as they have enlightened and spiritual messages to offer those who choose to pay attention. I've not read "The Blessed Life," nor am I likely to do so, but my point is I wasn't against the idea of its insertion into the worship service. Only that wasn't really the focus of the sermon, but we'll get to that momentarily.

I just want to make it clear that I'm willing to concede that Crossroads as a whole might not be as bad as I initially made it out to be. Though the approach is clearly not to my individual tastes, to each his/her own. That much ought to please my friend who asked me to return. However, I'm going to be issuing a formal apology in the paragraph after next, and I'm also likely going to unintentionally annoy my friend who wanted me to experience Crossroads again and feel better about the place as I did so. I genuinely wish I could feel better about Crossroads, but one thing prevents me from doing so. To be more specific, one man prevents me from doing so.

There was no talk in the sermon about this being the first week of Advent. There was no talk of preparing hearts and minds for the coming of Jesus Christ. There was brief mention made of Mary as one who was immediately obedient when she heard God's voice. Chuck Booher then charged his congregation with the task of also being immediately obedient when they hear God speak to them. As someone who has waited my entire life to hear God speak to me, allow me to state that I stand ever at the ready. But, at the risk of sounding glib, God doesn't call me. He doesn't text. He doesn't burn bushes near me. He doesn't invite me to supper. He doesn't send the Angel Gabriel down for tea. If and when He does, I am fully prepared to do whatever He says. What I am not prepared to do, however, is just accept that Chuck Booher hears God regularly, that God tells him what to wear and where to eat dinner (two things he asserted in his sermon). I have faith in God; I do not have faith in Chuck Booher.

As you can tell, during the sermon, I found myself less able to roll with it. I found myself having to bite my tongue. I do not fault those who are members of Crossroads. I fault the man behind today's message. And though I have no authority upon which to do so, on behalf of all of Christendom, I feel compelled to apologize for Chuck Booher. That's bound to tick people off, though it is not my intention to tick people off. It is my intention to calls 'em as I sees 'em. Please allow me to explain.

I'm going to start with tithing. Booher himself admits he can't shut up about it, and to be frank it is insulting. And the way he treats the subject is insulting, and I am not easily insulted. I'll let the numbers speak for themselves. As reported on the piece of paper handed to people as they walked in, last week Crossroads received just under $215,000 in offering. The previous week, they received just under $150,000. For those who are displeased with my harsh reaction to Chuck Booher, allow me to suggest to any member of Crossroads that they spend one month attending worship at any church in the area that collects less in an entire year than Crossroads collects in a single week. Visit any church, any denomination -- visit multiple churches, please. I encourage them to explore a church that isn't taking in that level of "tithing." I encourage them to explore a church that doesn't constantly make tithing the focus of sermons. For those who don't want to leave Crossroads, that's fine; allow me to suggest instead of tithing to Crossroads that they give to other nonprofit and charitable organizations. The long and short of what I want to make clear is a church does not need that level of money to serve in its capacity as a church. Assuming the previous two weeks are typical, Crossroads brings in $8 million annually, not counting revenue from the school, coffee bar, gift shop, book sales, and other sources of income. For Chuck Booher to keep hounding his congregation for money is borderline obscene.

Chuck Booher cited a single Bible verse, entirely out of context, as this week's rationalization for tithing. It was Luke 11:42, the full text of which is not about common men giving to the church. Read in context, it is about wealthy lawyers and holier-than-thou pharisees not giving their fair share to the community. Somehow, Chuck Booher perverted the meaning to be that Jesus was commanding everyone to give and give and give some more. In the sermons I have heard, Booher repeatedly rips passages out of context and distorts their meanings. Booher made a point of mocking those who don't tithe, stating only people who don't give complain to him about how much he mentions tithing. Well I give. Even in my current dire financial situation I give. I give to the homeless when I can. I give blood. I give my time to those in need. I offer prayers to those in pain. And I'm telling anyone who will listen that if people stopped giving money to Crossroads right now -- today -- it would be a better church. Booher made a point of stating people who tithe are going to receive a blessing, and those who do not are not. That isn't tithing; that's a plenary indulgence, and that's the kind of talk that made Martin Luther nail parchment to the door of his church 500 years ago. That's the kind of talk that led to the Protestant Reformation. Make no mistake about it, Chuck Booher is stating that giving money will get you more in the kingdom of God, a concept rejected by churches centuries ago.

And now I have to discuss baptism again, because while roughly half the sermon was devoted to tithing, the other half was devoted to the concept that baptism makes you a new and better person. I have to reveal my inner geek at this point and talk about "Star Trek V." For the geek-impaired, allow me to offer a brief summary of the story, which also serves as a sort of parable: A passionate Vulcan (half brother of Spock) named Sybok appears and tells people that he'll be able to instantly take their pain away and make them new, better, and happier people. When he approaches Captain Kirk, Kirk rejects Sybok's offer, knowing life doesn't really work that way. Kirk added he needed his pain, that it was a part of him, and that there were no quick fixes, despite how much we might want to believe otherwise. Later, Kirk asked what God needed with a starship, but that's a discussion for another day.

Today they had not one, not two, but three dunk tanks -- and an inflatable kiddie pool -- set up in front of the stage. I am not employing hyperbole. Chuck Booher wanted all those who were ready to accept Jesus to come on down and be baptized. Again, trying to roll with it, if this form of baptism is important to you, that is your choice. To me, what I was witnessing was people being baptized as members of Crossroads, not necessarily as Christians (not the fault of those who approached, by the way). And my reasons for believing as I do are Chuck Booher's own words. He pointed out that Jesus walked 60 miles through a desert to be baptized by the aptly named John the Baptist, and we, in turn, are baptized to recreate what Christ did. But Christ walked those 60 miles, did He not? He didn't merely walk down the aisle of a dimly lit auditorium. So why suggest that it is as massive an action when people only do half a thing? By Booher's own statement, we do as Christ did to honor Him, so wouldn't it be more appropriate for those who walked down the aisle to then be handed a compass and a pack of supplies and sent to walk -- not drive -- to Palm Springs to be baptized? If the baptism is so important, which I am not disputing, isn't the journey Christ took at least as important? In life, isn't the journey often more important than the destination? Granted, a 60 mile hike through San Bernadino would be a lengthy inconvenience, but where in the Bible are we promised quick fixes or easy solutions?

I've repeatedly mentioned the name Chuck Booher in this writing because I want it made clear that my problems with Crossroads all seem to stem from this man and what he deems important. A few years ago, Booher ordered Christians teaching at Crossroads to be fired if they were unwilling to be baptized through immersion. Around the same time, I was also fired from a purported Christian school because the way I chose to demonstrate my faith was deemed insufficient. I believe God can question my faith, but I am skeptical of any human who questions the faith of another.

Chuck Booher deems people lesser because they do not immerse themselves in water. Chuck Booher deems people lesser because they do not give to a church that is not in need. For a man who makes such bombastic assertions to lead a congregation makes me ashamed to be a Christian. And on behalf of Christians, I apologize, and I can only add that Booher's opinions do not reflect the management, if you catch my drift.

I've offered two very substantive problems I have with Chuck Booher. Let me close with two relatively minor cosmetic issues I have with Crossroads, both of which are easy to remedy. When I attended Crossroads just over a month ago, I noted with some sadness that the cross (the most sacred of Christian symbols) was not front-and-center, but just off to the side.

I note with some reservation that, since then, two additional screens have gone up, and the cross has been moved even further away from the center, to the far wall on the opposite side.

I cannot emphasize enough that everything I know to be true about Christianity tells me that Christ's crucifixion -- His dying for the sake of us and for the forgiveness of our sins -- was the single greatest act of love ever demonstrated by anyone. The cross is a reminder of that love, and a reminder that what He did far outweighs anything we can do. It is a big room -- move the cross to the center of it.

Lastly, a sign I noticed as I approached Crossroads, indicating the location of various buildings and services. I couldn't help but notice the absence of the word "church" or "sanctuary" among the listed items. To me, an auditorium is where concerts and staged productions occur, but worship services occur in a church or a sanctuary. It is fine if a single room serves both purposes, but it would be a sign of respect if God's house was identified as such on any signage on the property. Crossroads is a church -- tell visitors where the church is located.

And with that, I hope that my friend will accept that my issue is not with her or with any of the congregation of Crossroads, but with Chuck Booher. And I will do as I pledged and return to Crossroads... as soon as Booher has been removed as head of the congregation, or as soon as he publicly retracts the assertions he made that belittle others and question the faith of others. Such assertions are unChristian.

Amen.

______________________________________________________

Sunday Scorecard:

What is the contact info for the church?

Crossroads Christian Church
2331 Kellogg Avenue
Corona, CA 92881
951/737-4664
http://www.crossroadschurch.com

What was the denomination?

Non denominational

What Bible verses were referenced?

"The Blessed Life" by Robert Morris

What are the demographics of the congregation?

A good mix of ages, mostly young, less diverse ethnically

Was the atmosphere formal or casual?

A Starbucks is more formal... no alter, no candles, no vestments, casual dress by all involved

What was the music like?

Praise band, power ballad, 'nuf said

How was the use of PowerPoint?

Not exactly PowerPoint, but three big screens were above the stage (the cross was relegated to the far side) and the pastor was projected onto the screens.

Crossroads Christian Church

I am not a "megachurch" guy. When it comes to churches and worship services, I want things as traditional and contemplative as I can get, and the bigger the church, the less tradition and less contemplation I seem to get. I not only like ritual and formality in worship, but understand its ability to provide focus and clarity. That said, an ever-growing segment of the populace eschews such things in favor of large houses of worship that function as an extension of their family room. The idea behind such informality seems to be that God ought to be more attainable to the common man.

I know several people who have called (or continue to call) Crossroads their home church. I've attended weddings there. I've listened to the pastor's sermons. While I believe there are good people at Crossroads, I cannot in good faith (no pun intended) endorse their approach to worship. So I am clear, some people can and do benefit from the style and approach put into effect by those in charge there, and if they can get some good out of it, more power to them. However, I found the environment to be impersonal, dark, and at times condescending.

Worship began at 11am, and in a megachurch that means a Christian rock band pounds out some power ballads in praise of the Lord. As in many megachurches, people stand with their outstretched hands waving during the song. However, at Crossroads, most only outstretch and wave one hand, as the other is holding a cup of coffee. Also noteworthy are the volumes of people arriving more than 30 minutes after the start time, because punctuality goes hand-in-hand with formality, and the lack of one often denotes the lack of the other.

Having reviewed praise bands at length elsewhere, I've no need to recount my feelings about them, but for those who -- like me -- are not fans of modern music in worship service, I've invented a (grown up) game you can play. Ever play the "Fortune Cookie Game"? It is simple enough: As you read your fortune out loud, end it with the words, "... in bed." I humbly suggest doing this for any lyric sung by any praise band. The results will be darkly comedic.

"I'm on my knees before you... in bed"

"I am humbled by your greatness... in bed"

"I live to serve you... in bed"

"You are the king... in bed"

My point is not to be blasphemous. It is to point out the fundamental flaw inherent in trying to twist the modern to fit where it doesn't belong. It isn't that I dislike incorporating God into modern music (Mumford and Sons contains some powerfully spiritual aspects to their music); my beef is incorporating modern music into what I feel should be a callback to a different era, or -- if not a different era -- a different headspace. The music in worship ought to differ from the music in my iPod. In church, I do not want to rock out to the Lord, and I don't want Him reduced to a cheesy pop refrain.

Following the praise band, it was time for Communion, or "bread and juice" as the pastor referred to it. I'm not going to venture into the whole transubstantiation vs. consubstantiation debate, but can we all agree to take Holy Communion more seriously than casually referring to it as "bread and juice"? This is a tradition dating back two millennia where we recall Jesus in His last supper with his closest friends and disciples, during which He revealed that He was to give His body and blood as a sacrifice for the benefit of all of humanity. In Christian circles, this is kind of a big deal, and not something to be derided by someone purporting to be an ordained minister. Obviously, atheists and non-believers won't recognize the significance of Christians reenacting and commemorating that momentous event, but for a pastor to lessen its import disturbed me.

A few words on modern baptism and its life-saving attributes: A huge point of disagreement between me and most megachurches is that I was born once, and once was enough (some might even say it was once too many). Jesus Christ has always been in my life, as He has been in the lives of everyone who believes and doesn't believe in Him. There are people who celebrate the day they were "saved," and if you are one of those people, God bless you. However, the day you, me, and the whole of creation were saved was the day Jesus died for our sins, and you dunking your head in a jacuzzi pales in comparison (if what I wrote offends you, see the previous paragraph where a pastor referred to the ritual honoring the sacrifice of Jesus as "bread and juice" -- when the rituals are taken seriously, I respect it, but when they are accompanied by hoots, hollers, applause, and a power ballad, I struggle with that). I was baptized as a child, confirmed as a teen, and continue to reinforce and profess my faith every time I pray to God. But regardless of any of those actions, and regardless of any other conscious choices I make, Jesus saved me long before I was born, then I was born, and consequently I have no need to be born again.

Now comes the time to discuss the most important aspect of a worship service: The sermon. Regardless of whether your house of worship is traditional or contemporary, odds are somebody is going to stand in front of the congregation and attempt to offer insight into the words found in the Bible, most likely tying it into our everyday lives (although I'm aware of a growing number of churches absent this feature entirely). Last week a friend referred me to the sermon delivered at Crossroads which had been posted online, and I listened to it before attending today. Having heard two sermons, I think I can draw a few conclusions. In neither instance did the pastor of Crossroads take a single story or passage from the Bible, share it with the congregation, then dive into its meaning and subtext. Instead, he treated the Bible as a ransom note, chopping a few words here and a sentence there to piece together the points he wanted to make. I'm uncomfortable with the precedent this sets. I don't know about others, but I live in a world where context is key. Yanking slivers of passages to weave together an idea, ignoring -- or at least not bothering to explain -- how it fits into the rest of the narrative presents a myopic, disjointed, and sometimes childishly naive view of the original source material.

For instance, in today's sermon the pastor encouraged us to do three things:

1) Have faith

2) Take risks

3) Speak about faith

Off the top of my head, I could think of five Biblical stories wonderfully illustrating those three central ideas. But instead the pastor referenced the following (I'm not exaggerating):

Exodus 33:11

Exodus 17:11-13

Joshua 1:6-9

2 Timothy 1:7

Psalm 1:1-3

Joshua 3:5

Joshua 3:13

Joshua 3:15

Joshua 6:2

Genesis 15:16

Joshua 7:10-12

Numbers 32:23

Joshua 24:14-15

Luke 6:45

Ephesians 5:3-5

As you can see, he spent some time on Joshua, but he jumped back and forth through the Bible like a severely ADHD kid off his/her meds, and that is not a slight against people with such a condition. I've taught students with attention deficit issues; their differently abled brains can link a series of unrelated things in such a way that it makes perfect sense to them, but for the rest of us there is no concrete connection. Even granting the premise that the above verses contain a coherent thread; it still doesn't justify ripping words out of context, ignoring the bigger picture in favor of a smaller point.

A word of warning for the pastor: Speaking in extreme generalities can be unwise. The topic of tithing came up in the sermon (the sermon about faith, risks, and speaking about faith -- as I said, the sermon was all over the place), and the pastor stated (paraphrasing, though I think I'm fairly close to his exact words), "People who tithe always have more. It just always happens." This was meant to convince people to give, even passively shaming those who do not. I wanted to ask the pastor to point to me in the Bible where this tithing guarantee exists -- I wanted to, but at the end of worship he announced he could not stay because he had other things to do. I don't begrudge the man having to speak about the subject of tithes (all pastors inevitably must), but at least be real about it. And while I'm covering tithing, in Biblical times, a farmer might not have had money, so he'd give some of his crop to the church. But in modern times, I've yet to find a minister from any denomination suggest serving the church community could be done in lieu of financial tithing. In fact, in previous churches I've been a member of, I've offered my services only to be flatly rejected. In a modern America when churches are facing negative press for being money-grubbing tax-dodges, I'd think the bartering concept appeals to the better angels of our collective nature, but I guess I'm just talking crazy talk.

Speaking of crazy talk, part of today's sermon included a story of a woman the pastor knew who received a modern-day vision. While he was at it, why didn't he include a story of Santa Claus riding a unicorn? I'm not saying the woman in question didn't have a vision, but I'm saying it is odd that a pastor would feel inclined to include such an off-putting concept into a sermon. I won't speak in sweeping generalities, but I'd venture to say many people don't experience visions (unless they are alcohol or drug induced), and a modern story in a sermon is supposed to make the Biblical material into something more relatable and inclusive, not less.

Last item I wanted to cover was something the pastor said at the conclusion of his sermon. As he wrapped up imparting the import of courageously speaking about one's faith, he asked members of the congregation to have the courage to walk down the aisles to where he was standing and share their faith with him. And this alone signifies why I'm not a megachurch guy. In every church I've ever been a member, the least courageous action I could have taken would have been to approach my pastor. This concept of it requiring bravery is entirely foreign to me. The only brave aspect I could see of approaching the pastor at Crossroads is congregants might trip because the aisles are so dimly lit. I'm accustomed to an environment where the pastor stands in the back of the church after each worship service for some gladhanding and face time with every member of the congregation. At Crossroads, the pastor announced he'd have to duck out immediately after worship because he'd scheduled something else. I suppose it is possible the pastor had to officiate a funeral or visit a sick person in a hospital, but -- barring such eventualities -- what sort of pastor schedules something else on a Sunday?

As negative as all this sounds, these all might be positives to some people. Many people like not having to dress up for church, to bring their beverage of choice, to rock out to jamming tunes, to have a sermon geared towards shorter attention spans, to feel "saved" through their own actions, to be told that good things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people, to experience no connection to the people seated around them, to possess no attachment to the pastor, and to be told to just fork over the dough so great things can happen. Well, I have faith, and I'm taking a risk by voicing my concern that none of the above qualifies as my ideal Sunday worship service. But thousands of members of Crossroads undoubtedly disagree with me. God bless them all.

Amen.
______________________________________________________

Sunday Scorecard:

What is the contact info for the church?

Crossroads Christian Church
2331 Kellogg Avenue
Corona, CA 92881
951/737-4664
http://www.crossroadschurch.com

What was the denomination?

Non denominational

What Bible verses were referenced?

See the extensive list above

What are the demographics of the congregation?

A good mix of ages, mostly young, less diverse ethnically

Was the atmosphere formal or casual?

A Starbucks is more formal... no alter, no candles, no vestments, casual dress by all involved, pastor wore blue jeans and plaid shirt, and he walked on-stage with a coffee cup near the end of the service

What was the music like?

Praise band, power ballad, 'nuf said

How was the use of PowerPoint?

Not exactly PowerPoint, but a big screen was above the stage (the cross was relegated to the far side) and the pastor was projected onto the big screen.