Found
here. Our comments in bold.
------------------
We are happy the author found virtue in the various churches he attended. We understand the author's sentiments, and we generally agree. In an era where carefully choreographed, highly produced and professionally polished church services are highly visible and even revered, the ordinary church with ordinary people and ordinary preaching might seem preferable.
However, it's too easy these days to complain about mega churches with their laser lights and high tech wizardry, but the other side of the coin, the rudimentary church based in tradition and somber reflection is not automatically virtuous. A contemporary service is neither better nor inferior to the liturgy. An organ-led hymn is not better or worse than a full-on worship band.
Our criteria should not be established on how men organize or express a particular church. This mistake values flavor over substance, structure over the spiritual, and habit over purpose.
In our opinion, the gathering of the saints is for the primary purpose of giving God the glory due His name. If a church does not worship, that is, extoll the Lord in words, songs, and holiness, it is not a good church.
Further, a church shouldn't be defined by its Sunday services. Unfortunately, that is the way people tend to judge churches, which ultimately is a consumerist mentality. But a truly good church must include
- a passion for prayer
- a pursuit of holiness
- a vision for the lost
- ministry to the poor
It must be emphasized that the Bible doesn't tell us to find a good church. In fact, it almost seems like the churches mentioned in the Bible were uniformly troubled and dysfunctional. We would therefore suggest that finding a good church to attend should not necessarily be the goal. Perhaps what we should do is find a church we can help to be better.
-------------------------------