Pleasant Valley Community Church (Non-denominational), Owensboro, Ky

Seeing as I didn’t intend to stay in Owensboro as long as I did this weekend, I decided to accompany a friend to Pleasant Valley Community Church.  My friend (whom shall remain anonymous, as I always respect their privacy in my blogs) has been looking around at new churches in town to see what they may have to offer.  He has accompanied his girlfriend to this church once before, but since I was looking for something to review, and it’s always much more fun to go with friends as opposed to alone, I bit the bullet and conducted a review on a repeat church.  I really don’t have many rules or a code of ethics to this blog.  I have three at most:  don’t deliberately start shit on their turf, focus on the church and not the doctrine, and try not to visit repeat churches.  Sometimes rules are made to be broken.

For those who live in Owensboro, I think Pleasant Valley Church might be one of those that most folks are aware of.  If you rank it up there with Yellow Creek Baptist or Walnut Memorial, it’s the name I’ve heard dropped most often lately.  There are a few other churches in town that are non-denominational, such as the one in the old Lincoln Mall (forgot the name and too lazy to look it up), and one where the old Service Merchandise used to be off Frederica.  One growing trend I’ve noticed in Owensboro is the proliferation of non-denominational churches.  I sincerely believe that our older, more conservative churches are dying because, in the past ten years, a good chunk of the younger crowd has drifted to these more “friendly” and “accessible” churches where they won’t feel like pariahs if they stand out.  Thus, to understand the commonalities between non-denominational churches, I decided to go here to compare it to my previous visit to Crossroads in Newburgh.

A little bit about this church:  Pleasant Valley, I believe, is a newer church.  I think it’s about ten or fifteen years old.  I can’t remember hearing about it from before my high school days.  It’s located off Pleasant Valley road.  The church itself is a continually growing one, quite modern in its aesthetics, and boasts two services to accommodate the crowds.  My friend and I attended the early service.

When one pulls up to the front parking lot (which was a beast to navigate – they really need new parking facilities), by looking at the front of the church, it’s quite unassuming.  There’s a large cross in front of the door, but it looks like the building, before the church took it over, could have been a small warehouse.  Once my friend and I went in, I noticed a few things that one could both dock and add points on the basis of.  First, we weren’t greeted.  As I explained to my friend, hospitality and friendliness are two virtues a church should express when trying to draw in new members.  Some folks want to just be a face in the crowd.  Others do not.  If I had been actually seeking membership as a theist, I wouldn’t personally go somewhere I didn’t feel welcomed.  There were door greeters that filed us in, but unlike some other places I’ve visited, no one stopped to ask me any information or to get any details about myself or my friend.  This is, as I’ve stated before, a trend you find in larger church congregations, and it is a natural one.  Once you reach a population threshold, it becomes untenable to try and keep track of every new member.  The strength of the small congregation lies in its intimacy.  I, as a visitor, am not just a face in the crowd.  I was here, though.  To Pleasant Valley’s credit, though, the head preacher did stop and at least shake our hands and welcome us there.  However, there was no active discussion, nor chance to converse to learn more about the church or its congregation.  So, I have to dock points on that.

However…they did have donuts and refreshments.  That’s a step-above what other churches offer.  But, for me personally, and this is an example of my prejudices dictating my review:  I openly prefer a handshake in lieu of a long john.

Upon entering the sanctuary, which was easy to find, I did take notice of the similarities between Crossroads and this church.  There were quite a few seats (not nearly as large as Crossroads); there was room for about 300-350 people; somewhere near ¾ of that space was utilized in the first service.  I suspect the higher turn-out is during the second service and, of course, it’s probably due to having the option to sleep in.  I understand the temptation, but there are perks to attending the early service (elbow room, plus the participators are fresh, as well as the food).  That being said, the lay-out, as my friend agreed, resembled the inside of a coffee shop.  Allow me to explain:  there was quite a bit of modern artwork lining the walls, as well as the walls themselves were subdued pastels of green and blue, aside from the wall behind the altar itself, which was pained a dark brown with swirl designs.  There were four screens (two large, two smaller ones), as well as an oddly designed background consisting of blue pallets stacked in the background, as well as colored windowpanes hanging up as decorative art.  The altar itself was very small, but there was enough room for a live band to comfortably play, as well as for the preacher to work his ministerial magic.  The entire sanctuary was colorful, and it was, to be honest, pleasing eye-candy.  One can easily have the senses stimulated when inside the sanctuary, and I’m sure that assists in the mood of the worship.   Physically, Pleasant Valley has embraced modern technology, as well as attempting to connect with a younger, almost hipster crowd.  The physicality of Pleasant Valley appeals to the young, contemporary Christian, and that’s one of the many appeals I’m sure this church has in drawing in younger crowds. 

The crowd itself was mixed.  I noticed that there was a good mix of demographics represented, but there was quite a large emphasis on younger, college-aged and young adult folks.  There’s two factors to consider here.  First, we attended Pleasant Valley during its Orphan Sunday, hence some of the families were there in observation of that.  Secondly, I honestly believe that this particular younger demographic might have actually been underrepresented if my observation concerning the tendency to sleep in on Sundays is correct.  I’m sure the second service would show a spike in younger folks attending who are still recuperating from Saturday night.

We began our worship service abruptly (there was a countdown on the screens).  Pleasant Valley, like I’m sure most non-denominational churches, was praise-and-worship heavy.  Services go about an hour and a half, but at least 45 minutes of that was dedicated to praise and worship.  The live band was utilized to the fullest and we sang through probably about five songs or so (with quite a bit of the “filler talk”, praising God, making observations on the world, appealing to emotion – the type of phrasing that’s intended to induce worship).  The filler utilized quite a bit of Biblical references, but all of them that I took note of referenced “adoption” in some form or fashion; mostly metaphorical in the sense of God “adopting” those who accept Christ.  However, the theme and message was very consistent – if one didn’t know the topic of the day was adoption, one must have been asleep during the service.  One part of the filler, which I hate to associate it with the word “filler” but it was during the same time, was a “thank you” to the Veterans.  It was very appropriate, and though I wish our veterans had more of a shout-out, they did get a mention.

Musically, I recognized virtually none of the songs we sang, and I have a feeling most of them weren’t older than ten years or so.  Even when I attended praise and worship as a Christian, I can’t recall us ever using any of these songs…though that could just be a failure of my memory.  At any rate, the lyrics were projected on the screens and they were easy to follow.  That being said, I didn’t find the worship service particularly compelling.  About 1/3 of the people seemed really into it, with a slight few raising their hands, but the singing was restrained, and the worship was very impersonal.  There were quite a folks looking around, tending to their kids, or staring off into space.  This is, I have to say, a commonality I’ve noticed between now the two non-denominational services I’ve attended.

So, we come to the message itself.  I’ll go ahead and get the negatives out of the way first:  it was kind of long and somewhat boring.  But, boring as it may have been, this has to be the most diversified message I’ve heard.  I say that because, in making his points, the preacher used a lot of Biblical verses (notice I don’t use the word “evidence”) to back up his points.  I think we had verses from Mark, Ephesians, Corinthians, John, Matthew…and I’m sure I’m leaving some out).  Pleasant Valley is Bible-heavy, but I say that in a loaded sense:  I’m sure they’re Bible-heavy concerning the cherry-picked portions of the Bible that agrees with their morality.  I would hedge my bets that this is so because of the small snippet of “hell-fire” I almost got this morning.  The preacher, on mentioning Hell, would only say “there’s some that won’t stand in the glory of God”.  He would not say “Hell”.  Usually churches that shy away from the Hell-fire will often shy away from the more brutal and uncomfortable parts of the Bible.  It’s a trend that’s so common that I feel safe in backing my assessment.

On the positive side, this message was…well…positive.  It was a call-to-action message.  The message itself was based upon Ephesians 1:3-6 and 5:1-2.  The notes are scarce, which I have to dock them points on, but there were essentially three main sub-headers to our message this morning:

1. “There is an eternal aspect to the adopting heart of God”.
2. “There is an universal aspect to the adopting heart of God”
3. “We adopt because we’ve been adopted”.

That’s the bare essence of the message.  The preacher was younger (probably mid 30s, but he was graying so he may be older).  He was very animate, emotional, and excited.  He engaged in a lot of hand-gesturing, and his method of delivery can best be described as “rapid-fire”.  As I said, the amount of verses he cited was impressive, but his delivery of them made it hard to keep track of them, even though the verses were all posted on the screens.

The message itself:  first and foremost, as a “call-to-action” message, it did make me think about how I, as an atheist, could help in the realm of adoption.  They handed out slips of paper asking for those to check a list of options that “God is leading” them to do.  Included are:  salvation, adoption, foster care, mentor, CareNet, participate in “the plan” (a donation plan), Kenya Kids, pray, or more information.  Prayer was offered in case folks weren’t “in the position to help”.  In response, I crossed out prayer as I thought it was the cop-out option and substituted my own:  “get into the position to help”.  I’m glad attention is being brought to the subject, though.

Within the context of the message, and having nothing to do with adoption, I was able to glean a few doctrinal points of the church.  I think, for the most part, they are a group of Young-Earth Creationists.  If they aren’t, then the preacher’s words on “God’s literal creation of the earth” and the way he spoke of it can’t be understood as just “metaphor”.  It’s the only conclusion I could draw from their use of “creation” and the sense in which the preacher spoke of it.

Secondly, as I stated above, they’re not big on the Hell-fire and damnation.  They do, however, believe in the devil as a literal being.  He got a small mention in the message.

Third, I felt very dehumanized relative to my other visits.  This is what I would call a “groveling” church.  About every other word out of the preacher’s mouth was a combination of “we’re not worthy” and “isn’t so awesome we worship a God who has done this, and this, and this for us?”  Any combination of the two wouldn’t be a far stretch from what we heard this morning.  There was a lot of aspect on mercy, but it all seemed in the context of man’s unworthiness.  There’s no a lot of credit given to man and his accomplishments.  Example:  when discussing adoption, they thanked God without really thanking the families for giving their time, resources, and effort.  As if the family didn’t do anything?  That, to me, is a bit abrasive.  Give credit where credit is due.  Apologies, this is my humanism speaking, but this church does a very strong sense of removing the individual from the picture and refocusing it on God.  Of course, that’s sometimes the goal…

Lastly, this church, as I said, is one that focuses on the loving, merciful aspects of Christianity.  I’m not going to say that it is necessarily a bad thing, but it would make sense, as those churches that “keep it real” usually have the smaller congregations (Catholics being the notable exception I’ve seen so far).  The logic was quite circular:  you’re “lost”, “broken”, “needy”, “sinners” (words actually used this morning) and you need God, who is so merciful, kind, and loving that he sent his only son to die for you.  Unbelievers like myself understand the circular reasoning here, combined with the loads of other fallacious modes of reasoning, but I’ll leave it at that.

I do have to give the preacher credit.  He spoke out against Pat Robertson on a point of contention.  I’ll give him a point there.

Once the message proper was concluded, all of the persons who have contributed or been affected by foster care were invited up to the front, and we (well, they) gave a round of applause to God.

After that, we had a last song, and we were dismissed.

So, a few points to consider not related to the worship service.  The bulletin they offered was fairly informative.  Within the bulletin, they included a budget, the staff, announcements, etc.  I think they used way too much paper, though; there was quite a bit white on the paper.  The sermon notes were also very scant.  I also noticed what appeared to be a moderate amount of “extra-curricular” activities; could have used more if we assume this church has almost 800-1,000 people attending.

Overall, I got about what I expected.  These non-denominational churches are very similar in both their strengths and weaknesses.  I liked Crossroads better, but there was nothing surprising here.  Now for the breakdown:

Congregation

Friendliness (.3/1)

Message

Topic Interest (.8/1)

Inspirational/Educational Value (.7/1)

Clarity (.7/1)

Applicability (.8/1)

Worship

Content (.5/1)

Audience Participation (.5/1)

Outreach

Community Involvement (.7/1)

Variety of Activities (.7/1)

Information

Accessibility (.7/1)

Total = 6.4

.0 = None

1 = Excellent