Consulting, Coaching & Chatter

Acts 1:8. You probably know the passage by heart: “You will be my witnesses from Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” Those words were spoken to the apostles just before Jesus left them in charge.

And of course, we know the rest of the story, don’t we? Holy Spirit weekend, thousands of converts, the launch of the Christian movement, and the apostles immediately mobilized to head out to be witnesses to the “ends of the earth.”

Ya think?

Nuh uh. Let’s take a look at what really went on.

Pentecost is over. The new church is in full swing. Good things are happening – except for the Hebraic widows who needed some attention. And the apostles? They do a good job of delegating the task to seven who were charged with taking care of the issue.

But wait – what is it the apostles said? “It wouldn’t be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God” (Acts 5:2). Sounds like they’re really busy spreading the word from Jerusalem and in all of Judea and Samaria … right? Well, not so much. They’re still hanging out in Jerusalem (taking care off all those administrative tasks, no doubt).

But those seven guys, the first deacons, tasked with taking care of the widows? Well , six verses later we find Stephen street preaching and getting himself killed. Then a “great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem” (Acts 8:1). The verse says that the whole church was scattered throughout Judea and Samaria.

Everyone except the apostles. They hunkered down in Jerusalem while the rest of the church fled. Well, so much for all that administrative work.

Philip, one of the deacons, however, gets busy being a witness and taking the word to the people … in Samaria (Acts 8:4). And folks there became Christian and the news about it spread – all the way to Jerusalem. So Peter and John actually leave the office to go check it out. They come to Samaria, verify that God has actually shown up there, and then … they returned to Jerusalem (to their credit, they did preach their hearts out on their way home – 8:25).

In the next chapter, God gets a hold of Paul and the focus of evangelizing the world shifts. Paul tries to break into the inner circle in the main office in Jerusalem, but he didn’t get far. For his own safety, he’s hustled up to Tarsus (9:30).

The next thing we know the Holy Spirit gets involved and Peter is called up out of Jerusalem to visit Cornelius and the Gentiles are no longer off limits to the witnessing Jesus talked about in 1:8. But do the apostles jump on that bandwagon? Nope. Peter returns to Jerusalem where he makes his report to the other eleven apostles.

The rest of the book of Acts reads like this. Paul hits the road and starts churches. Then he returns to Jerusalem and reports to the apostles what God’s been doing. Then he bids the apostles farewell and hits the road as a witness to the ends of the earth.

Repeat. Twice.

From Acts 11 until the end of the “Acts of the Apostle” Paul and Barnabas and Silas and others are on the road doing the “ministry of the word” while the apostles – the “one’s sent” stayed in Jerusalem.

And so it would remain, or so it seems, until God sent the Roman “bulldozers” to Jerusalem in about AD 70 to motivate the twelve to leave their office.

So, what are the lessons to be learned here?

First, God’s the one in charge and if God could work around the twelve guys who were “sent” but chose to pretty much stay at home, then there are none of us so darned important that God’s work is going to be sidelined. The final chapter has already been written with our without us.

On the other hand, if we don’t take seriously God’s calling to be witnesses beyond our office walls, then we had better be willing to bear the consequences. For one, if we won’t be faithful, God will raise up someone else who will be and ultimately they’ll not only get the credit for what we were supposed to do, but they’ll get to experience the joy of fulfilling what the Lord has ordained.

There’s a potential second consequence that we need to be aware of as well. If we are reluctant to be faithful to our calling, God may allow (or arrange) circumstances to “motivate” us to faithfulness. I’m not saying Jerusalem was routed because the apostles refused to be witnesses any further than their own backyards, but God will use what God will use to get the point across.

The good news in all of this is that the apostles themselves did eventually move out into all the world. But our world (or our neighborhood, community, county, etc.) isn’t going to get evangelized unless we get  out of our church offices. In the words of Dr. LeRoy Benefield, my beloved Southern Baptist evangelism professor, “No one gets saved in the church office.”

(BTW, if you need help figuring out how to get out of the office, you might want to take a listen to the Church-Talk  episode on the topic at: http://church-talk.com/church-talk-video-archive/11-03-09/.)

I was working on a worship evaluation and thought that I’d share words and recommendations about a church’s welcome. If you’re going to be open and welcome to guests, you might want to consider the following.

Hospitality begins in the parking lot. Well, it really begins when a guest goes to your website to find out where you are and what time your services are, but that’s a different post for a different time. If you have outdoor greeters, and parking lot greeters specifically, the congregation’s hospitality truly begins as a guest comes out of their vehicle. Indeed, with an effective parking lot greeting team, any lack of signage and parking issues actually become mute (during worship hours), since a guest couldn’t get lost because there would always be a greeter in sight.

I can’t stress how important greeters actually are. Some other time I’ll share the story of Dean King at Decatur First Christian Church in Georgia, but let me say that one of the reasons I became a member of that church and the Disciples of Christ denomination is because of Dean’s welcome and greeting. There are few more important jobs in a church than being a greeter, so why do we rotate greeters and use people who are, shall we say, less than gregarious? Whomever is your best welcomer should be permanently recruited and deployed as the church’s lead greeter. Frowns, scowls, or even inattentive folks need not apply. With that in mind, here are some recommendations I regularly make to churches I work with.

Recommendation 01: Raise up a team of parking lot greeters for all public services. There should be no less than two parking lot greeters, and three would increase the level of hospitality significantly. These greeters should be outfitted with walkie-talkies, safety vests, and either directional flashlights or white gloves (which looks really sharp). In addition, they should have access to large golf umbrellas for rainy day greeting.
The Parking Lot Greeters should be individually stationed at the entrance to the church’s driveway as well as in the corpus of the parking area. Guests and members alike should be pointed to appropriate parking slots. In the spirit of hospitality, service, and sacrifice, able bodied members should park in the farthest reaches (least desirable) of the parking lots to ensure guests and differently-abled participants can park nearest the worship center. Membership has responsibilities, not privileges.

Parking Lot Greeters are charged with ushering vehicles to appropriate parking, greeting members and guests alike, and providing a helping hand to those who need it. The greeters should do more than just point out open parking spots, but should be gregariously engaged with arriving participants. For those who are well trained, the name of guests will be extracted in the greeting conversation … and relayed to the Information Booth team who can then greet the guests by name when they enter the building. Of course, the Parking Lot Greeters should escort participants to the entrance when it’s raining, with the infirm, or whenever guests need assistance in any other way.

Parking Lot Greeters should remain at their posts until at least fifteen minutes into the worship service … and the greeter stationed in the main parking lot should take up a post either just outside of the worship center doors, or just inside the doors with their eye turned toward the parking lot in search of any latecomers who need to be greeted.

Recommendation 2: If  your congregation uses them, dispense with member name tags. First, they are not ecologically renewable and second, they may add to a guest’s discomfort as their paper badges set them off as an “outsider.” It is a better practice for everyone – members and guests alike to wear paper name tags (a renewable resource). To facilitate this each week, you could place at least three or more high-top tables in the patio area for greeters and name-tag artists to work. Greeters should greet every person and help them to the high tops to get their name tags. Members and guests alike should be introduced to the name tag artists who quickly write out a name tag. Everyone should have a name tag … if someone gets in without one, it should only be because they were not greeted. During inclement weather, the tables could be either moved under the overhang, inside the building, or perhaps patio screen “tents” could be erected to provide shelter.

Recommendation 3: It seems that most greeters and ushers remain active at their posts only through the first five minutes or so of the worship services. However, first time and returning guests, as well as members, may arrive late … sometimes quite late. To provide excellent hospitality services, there should be at least one greeter in the narthex at all times during the worship service. This greeter could serve as an Information Center host as well.

Recommendation 4: Train a number of gregarious folks to be Worship Hosts. These hosts are strategically located in different zones within the sanctuary. Their job is to ensure first time and returning guests are greeted, questions answered, and generally made to feel welcome without overwhelming them. They should be “at their posts” before worship no later than ten minutes before the service begins.

Much more could be said of all four of these greeting stations, but you get the gist. Greeters should greet and not get involved in distracting conversations, especially with members. Ushers should ush – they should do more than just hand out a bulletin with a smile (or a grunt). Helping folks find seats, asking congregants to slide into the middle of the row to allow for space on the aisles, and so on are all ushers’ tasks. And hosts welcome – they ensure folks don’t fall through the cracks. If you get these four recommendations implemented, it’s a good bet your guests will have at least know they were welcomed.

I get to see a lot of church newsletters pretty regularly. Some come by email, some with a stamp, but what they all have in common is that I get them. Since I’m not a member of most of these churches, I have to surmise that I’m not the only non-member who’s getting their news. In fact, I suspect that most visitors who bother to leave their contact information probably end up on the mailing list … that’s just good practice. Well, it should be good practice, but for many of the churches who are sending me newsletters, it would actually be a terrible practice.

There’s the newsletter I saw just the other day. It was a bit dated with lots of clipart that I tend to associate with the 1970s, but they had used their whitespace well enough. Most of the content was pretty inane for an outsider with lots of thank yous to people for flowers, get well wishes for Bob, and a plea for more ushers. What wasn’t so inane was the pastor’s column. In fact, that was pretty entertaining. Seems like there was some sort of fiasco that went on in the previous board meeting and the pastor was lambasting both those who were there and those who were not. It would have brought a smile to my lips if it wasn’t for the fact that I was pretty sure there were maybe fifty or more non-members who might be reading this rant. I know that if I was considering the church as a possibility for membership, I’d be looking for somewhere else.

So, here’s a couple of tips for you … and if you need a more thorough critique, we can do that too (www.NetResults.org/cart).

Effective Church Newsletters:

• Are positive. Your newsletter is probably being read by more than just your congregation. Ask yourself this question before you approve (or write) any article: Would I really want my unchurched next door neighbor or my district superintendent (bishop, regional minister, etc.) to read this?
• Have articles that matter. If you’re going to write an article, make it worth reading. Newsletters are not the congregational or community source for devotional material. Include articles that move, touch, and inspire. Help your readers to make their faith practical, teach them how to pray, help them keep their marriage afloat, and so on.
• Limit “insider” information. Here’s the ideal: if it doesn’t apply to everyone, it doesn’t go into the newsletter. That’s the ideal. The real world is a bit more flexible, but if you expect your reader to know who Sue is, where the Women’s Parlor is, or what time and where the men’s breakfast is, you’re missing the boat.
• Market upcoming events. If an event is worth doing, it’s worth talking about – but only if it invites and includes those outside the congregation. Don’t use a list  of bullet point events, give the reader some information including why they should bother wanting to come to your new small group initiative.
• Are accurate. There’s nothing worse than showing up for a six o’clock meeting at seven. Make sure your details are spot on.
• Have “testimonies.” There’s an old saying that the best marketers are satisfied clients. Every issue of your newsletter ought to have at least one short article on why someone is involved or joined or comes to your church. Weed out the sentimentalism and include the inspired. That’s a fine line, but one worth heeding.
• Are proofread and proofread again. Don’t send out sloppy grammatically incorrect and typo-filled newsletters. If you don’t have a critical eye, find someone who does. The quality of your newsletter is a reflection on who you are. If you don’t care enough to run spell and grammar check and then carefully read it directly, it really can’t be that important.

So, there you are. A few golden rules for newslettering. Remember, your members aren’t the only ones reading it, so make it great!

I wrote this entry the other day and I think I posted it … but in the great server switchover, it appears to have been misplaced. So, just in case, here it is again.

I had a conversation with some pastors about one of the seminars they had attended. They had gone looking and hoping for another program that would help them launch their churches into the stratosphere – or at least grow their churches past where they were. As I reflected on the conversation later, it dawned on me that what they were hoping to find was that elusive bottle of magic pills that would cure the ills and grow their churches for them.

Just a couple of years ago, a Lilly research project looked at mainline churches that were growing through conversion growth, that is, churches that were reaching and transforming the unconnected into disciples of Jesus Christ. That study revealed that there are indeed a lot of “programs” that are being used to grow churches. Small groups, Alpha, Disciple, Forty Days of Purpose, and more. However, what the study suggests is something most of us already know: it’s not the programs that are growing these churches. We know that because small groups, Alpha, Disciple, Forty Days of Purpose, and so many more are also failing to grow thousands of other churches. All these programs, literally all of them, are placebos that have absolutely no power in themselves to transform or even grow churches in the long term.

As revealed in the study, the difference between the churches that are reaching the unconnected with abandon, compared to the many that reach few, is that growing churches have developed a climate of evangelism that permeates the church’s culture. The study also clearly showed that that culture was largely created and maintained by the pastor, staff, and congregational leadership. But we knew that, didn’t we?

So, why do we still seem to be obsessed with finding a magic pill bottle to cure all our ills? I have a number of ideas that I don’t believe I’ll but into print, but I will say this: The solution is not another program. So long as church leaders continue to spend their time overlooking the obvious in hopes of finding shortcuts or magic pills, their churches will continue to struggle.

Maybe it’s the circles I’m hanging with lately, but suddenly there’s a jump in the interest on house church. Bill Easum’s article in On Track (the 21st Century Strategies monthly E-zine) reviewed Frank Viola’s Reimagining the Church because of “the importance of the book.” And I agree, it’s an important book, just as Viola’s Pagan Christianity was important. However, when it comes to the mainline church, I suspect Viola’s message will mostly fall on deaf ears. Why? I invite you to read the books for the whole scoop, but here’s a reality of these books: they discount virtually every practice and tradition the church holds sacred. In these books, Viola slaughters more sacred cows than Iowa Beef Processors. Pulpits and pews? They’re gone. Vestments? So yesterday. Preaching? Gone. Buildings? Apostate … or almost … living rooms are okay.

Don’t get me wrong. On the whole, I like most of what Viola has to say. He and I have been singing off of the same page for a long time. But there’s a weighty question out there for me. Is the church of yesterday really the church of tomorrow?

There are a lot of voices “out there” not only saying yes, but nodding their heads vigorously. Why, aren’t we in what amounts to a pre-Christian world?

Nope. Not at all. Those who claim we’re in a pre-Christian world not unlike Paul’s world are idealistic at best, and a half-bubble off level at worst. It is true that Paul’s world was filled with paganism and a menu of cosmo religions. There are any number of similarities between Paul’s pre-Christian world and ours. But there is one huge, overriding difference. Paul didn’t live and breath and work as a part of a church that had a reputation throughout his culture of being antiquated, irrelevant, hypocritical, and impotent. Weird and cultish, yes. Antiquated, irrelevant, hypocritical, and impotent, no.

I went to Angels and Demons yesterday (I rate it much better and less troublesome than Dan Brown’s other offering). Whether you watch the movie with unconnected or well-connected eyes, you can’t help but notice the church’s struggle with relevance, tradition, and the battle with science (and culture as a whole). The movie hardly helps the church, though I’m pretty sure it doesn’t hurt us either. The church itself has done a marvelous job of shooting itself in the foot (in North America, I’m not convinced we haven’t shot ourselves in the head). A movie that points it out isn’t going to make things worse.

Which brings me back to the question … in order to recapture the faithful practice of Christianity, is going back to the “biblical” church the answer?

Let me shed some light on the myth of the notion of the biblical church. First, the notion that a “biblical” church is/was God’s mandate is seriously flawed. If God had wanted to give us a blueprint for what the church was intended to be like, our New Testament would look a lot more like the Torah, complete with building plans of what the church building should like … or not, as the case may be. Israel got an instruction manual for their version of “church” in the ancient days. The priests were even told what to wear and which fingers/thumbs to dip into the blood of the sacrifices. Everything about that “church” was mandated between the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. Turn to the New Testament to look for any sort of similar instructions and you’ll be sore disappointed. The best we get is a character list of godly leaders.

Turns out, God’s been blessing the church in its many different manifestations over the years. Although the house church is the only “biblical” church, it’s clearly not a mandated model. Churches with church buildings have been variously effective over the years and many faithful and effective Christians have been birthed, raised, and sent forth from that model (Mother Theresa and Billy Graham are two that come instantly to mind). On the other hand, churches without church buildings have been variously effective over the years as well and is now one of the most prevalent and fastest growing models in the world. However, the human tendency and need to institutionalize is a strong one, and I suspect that even those flourishing house churches in India and China will one day be in our boat. History has a strange way or repeating itself.

But there’s another fallacy in the notion that house church is the solution for the church of tomorrow – which it could very well be, but it’s not likely to be the prime solution in my lifetime and not likely in yours. We live in a capitalist, consumerist culture. Not only has the church not been able to change that, in many ways, the church has inculcated that (something about the Protestant Ethic comes to mind). In a consumer, post-Christian culture that carries around the church’s reputation like a chip on its shoulder, house church is going to be a tough sale. The typical questions I hear are almost always about nursery care, youth programming, and so on. Until the church stops being a purveyor of services for its members, the house church is going to have limited appeal. Indeed, it wasn’t that long ago that house church researchers were struggling to find a statistically significant number of North American house churches that had been in existence over five years. They may have found enough by now, but what they were finding is that most house churches disbanded within a couple of years. There are many reasons this is true in North America, but that doesn’t change the fact that short lived house churches aren’t around long enough to make the difference that Frank Viola and others are calling for. Apparently, when it comes to “church,” our culture by and large still insists on “programs.” House church isn’t really big on programs … and either is Viola.

All this may sound like I’m suggesting that the house church is not a solution. In some ways, that’s exactly what I’m saying. House churches won’t “save” the mainline … indeed, it won’t save any denomination. Only a very few house church networks are able to support professionally trained clergy (few of whom “get” house church anyway), so it’s not going to be the hope for appointing Methodist Elders or providing full-time jobs to those leaving seminary with student debt. And it’s not likely to “catch on” suddenly anytime soon so that the North American House Church Movement starts looking like the Chinese House Church Movement. Like the Willow Creek model, most of us aren’t Bill Hybles in South Barrington County and most of us aren’t living in China where the pre-Christian culture is actually a pre-Christian culture.

On the other hand, I think that the church as it exists today needs to learn a LOT from the house church. Discipleship simply hasn’t and generally doesn’t happen effectively within the walls of the brick-and-mortar (B&M) church. It hasn’t and generally doesn’t even happen in most church’s small groups. For the past too-many years, the church has lived under the delusion that it could “teach” Christianity by filling our brains with information about God and about the life of a Christian. That’s gotten us to where we are now (how’s that working for you?). The house church is probably the most effective model for developing disciples of Jesus … but it does it because it’s not curriculum based, but discipleship making, living life as a disciple of Jesus based organism. The good news is that this in infinitely transferable to the B&M church.

So, is the church of yesterday really the church of tomorrow? The answer is definitely not. And absolutely yes. But it’s not likely to look like what most of the pundits would want it to look like.

George Barna recently came out with a poll reporting that the majority of Christians don’t believe in either Satan or the Holy Spirit. Since then, I have received a small mountain of emails with Christian leaders crying “Where did the church go wrong?” I suppose these questions probably deserve and answer, but I’m not going to be the one writing treatises on where the church failed – at least not with this blog post. The sad fact is, that anyone who’s suddenly astounded with reports like these are woefully out of touch with the “real” world anyway.

The real question that needs to be answered isn’t about where the church went wrong. The burning question that begs an answer is “What are we going to do about the sad state of Christianity in developed nations?” Just a reminder for those who are unaware, the world of Christianity is doing very well on a global level. Figures show that global Christianity is gaining some 90,000 converts each day. However, Christianity in the West is doing, shall we say, rather poorly. The ARIS report that came out a couple of weeks ago showed that Mainline Christianity has lost over 6 million adherents since 2001 and that Christianity itself has shrunk from 86 percent of the USAmerican  population in 1990 to 76 percent in 2008. Of course, any religion that can claim 76 percent of the population should really be making a difference in the culture, but that cannot be said of Christianity. With less than 15 percent of us showing up for organized worship and discipling on any given weekend, it’s clear that our practices don’t match our verbiage (there are lots of other examples, but that one will have to suffice).

The problem with the problem is that it’s so encompassing that it’s paralyzing our church leaders. It’s one thing to say “Think glocally,” it’s quite another to do anything differently. Since I seem to be particularly fond of lists of five, here are three steps to start turning things around in your world.

1. Build a foundation of faith beginning with you. It’s been said that Billy Graham once estimated that only about 10 percent of church goers were practicing Christians. Hearing his pronouncement, a prominent sociologist reflected that Graham was being generous. As James put it (2:17–18), it’s one thing to say you’re a person of faith – it’s something else again to put it into practice. So, let me ask you a couple of questions (that you’ve no doubt heard before). What did you read last week in the Bible that intrigued you? If you’re a pastor, add the proviso “outside of your sermon study.” Here’s another one – with whom did you personally share your faith story last week and what were the results? Again, pastor, sharing your story in the pulpit gets no credit. And one last one – who have you personally encouraged in their faith journey today? If you’re not praying, reading scripture, encouraging fellow Christians, and sharing your faith with the unconnected then, frankly, you’re contributing to the problem, not to the solution. Without a foundation, the rest of this is pointless.
2. Get excited about what’s going on in your church, or get another church. And when I say “get excited, “ I mean Prius owner excited. According to Ron Crandall, the number one issue facing smaller congregations is self-image. Let me add that it’s not just the little churches that struggle with self-worth. Any church over forty years old is faced with the temptation of looking back on the “good old days” of yesteryear. John Maxwell observed that if what you did back then looks pretty big now, then you haven’t done much today. I’m coaching a congregation that is struggling with that very issue. The reality is that they have a lot going for them, but they’re facing some tough decisions for the future. Some of these decisions are painful, and so there is a feeling of dread amongst many in the congregation. This malaise has perpetuated a sense of “we’re not worthy” or “we’re not good enough” across the congregation. And a member who feels that way isn’t going to invest much in the future of the congregation. They won’t invite their friends, acquaintances, neighbors, or co-workers to the church’s worship service. They won’t write large checks, let alone tithe checks, to support the work of the congregation. The truth is, there are a lot of churches “out there” that are going to continue to choose tradition over  faithfulness to mission. The solution for the faithful is to either instigate a change or to find a new congregation. And when I say “instigate a change” I don’t mean wait it out. I mean do something to bring about the change or leave. If there aren’t enough of the faithful in the congregation to out maneuver  the bullies and terrorists, then leave them to themselves. Get excited or get on down the road.
3. Major on the majors. The Paraeto Principle states that 20 percent of what we do brings 80 percent of the results. The corollary is that we spend 80 percent of our resources dealing with those activities that waste our time. We see this demonstrated in the church regularly. Twenty percent of the leaders do 80 percent of the work. Twenty percent of our programs and activities bring 80 percent of the results. But in a church, what are the majors? I’d tell you that it depends on what your mission is, but if you’ve read almost anything I’ve written you know that I’m a real believer in the “there’s only one mission” of the church school of thought: make disciples. Making disciples includes both making new disciples and making more effective disciples – but you can’t have one without the other. What we’ve found is that most churches do neither effectively. Why? Because they don’t major on the majors.

Emphasizing the majors means putting the church’s resources into those activities that net real results. Although that sounds easy, there’s really little that’s more difficult. It begins by being honest – ruthlessly honest – with your programming and activities. Ask the question of each activity on the calendar, “Will this activity facilitate making more disciples?” If it’s a choir tour of Anglican churches, the answer is obviously no. If the answer to the first question is no, then you ask the second question, “Will this activity help the participants become more effective disciples?” That’s a trickier question. First, you’ll need to determine what an effective disciple looks like. In many churches, an effective disciple is obviously defined as someone who’s heavily involved in the church’s activities. If they show up for committee meetings, Sunday school, board meetings, all church clean-up days, bake sales, choir practice, worship, and Bible study, then they’re deemed “faithful.” They may not have shared their faith with an unconnected person in over twenty years, but they’re “active” in  church, thus they must be a faithful disciple.

Once you’ve defined what a disciple is like, then you can take a stab at measuring your activities. If your activities aren’t helping Bob and Sheila to become more effective disciples in their “real” lives, then it’s probably something that should either be “tweaked” so that it does or else it should be abandoned completely.

I get a good bit of pushback on this, generally because someone has a pet project that fails both tests, but they want to do it anyway. I’m not suggesting that everything that fails the two tests should come to an end, but I am saying that these activities must expend a minority of the church’s resources. But in most churches, that means that there are a bunch of pet projects that are going to end up on the cutting-room floor. Save the annual all church picnic, if the doors would close without it, but do away with the other resource wasters. Simply put, if an activity isn’t making more or better disciples, then it shouldn’t be on the church’s calendar and the church shouldn’t be investing any staff, facilities, or financial resources on it.
So, there you are. Three concrete and practical tasks to start turning around the church. Will it change the minds of those who don’t believe in Satan or the Holy Spirit? Probably no time soon. But in the meantime, it will change the face of your congregation.

Today I’m beginning the last leg of three weeks on the road. It’s been an interesting journey that almost transcends history.

It began almost three weeks ago at the 2009 TYPO3 Conference in Dallas. There, we talked about and learned more about internet ministry, particularly using a Content Management System to create websites that don’t just sizzle, but facilitate real ministry. It was a look at the future.

Next came Exponential 2009 where I was one of the presenters (thanks to Bill Easum for the opportunity). Exponential is the nation’s largest church planting conference. I had the good fortune to rub shoulders with Alan Hirsch, Francis Chan, Ed Stetzer, Tom Clegg, and Neil Cole – all heroes of my faith journey. Since I’ve planted a couple of churches in my day, I found it both exciting and depressing to hear what’s going on in the church planting world (more on why it depressed me in a future post).

Next, it was off to Chicago and the NACCC Minister’s Convocation on the Mundelein Seminary campus (NACCC = National Association of Congregational Christian Churches). I was asked to lead a retreat on the “E” word. It was a beautiful setting and gratifying to know that there’s rising interest in relevant evangelism practices in the Congregational Church.

And so, now I’m on my way to New York where I’ll lead a training/overview on the house church movement to United Methodist clergy who are interested in doing something completely different. That will be gentle look into our past.
Future, Present, and Past. It’s where the church is.

As I take a few minutes to reflect on my journey, I’m heartened by the men and women whose eyes lit up as we talk about ministry practices that can speak to the present and future generations. But my joy is tempered by the reality that has so clearly presented itself by so many of the leaders I’ve rubbed shoulders with these last three weeks. There is a resignation in the eyes, defeat in their minds, and hopelessness in the spirits of far too many of our church leaders. They’ve heard the spiel of the pundants and the promise of their programs for too long and have seen so little change. They’ve tried a little bit of this and a little bit of that. They’ve gone to mega church conferences, micro retreats, and denominational convocations that roll out more hype than a used car sales commercial, but leave with little substance. And so, largely, they’ve given up and are mostly going through the motions.

Who’s to blame them? Most – though certainly not all – got into ministry to change lives through Jesus Christ. But let’s be really, really honest. Most of the members of most of our churches are pretty much the same people they’ve been for decades. They may know more about the Bible and they may know more about God, but their primary spiritual relationship is with the the church rather than with Jesus – with the bride rather than groom.

And so, I continue my journey … physically, mentally, and spiritually. I’m biblically grounded enough to know God’s in charge and the Spirit can do great and awesome things. And I’m a student of history enough to know that just because they can, they’ve seldom moved upon a culture to change the hearts of the adherents, choosing to move on to receptive fields (currently in China, India, SE Asia, Northern Africa, and Latin America). Historically the change, if there is to be one, comes from those who are willing and able to emerge from the culture and rise above it. That won’t come from programs, but from life changes – and until our eyes light up, there will be precious few of those.

I checked and it’s been a couple of weeks since I’ve blogged. Those who follow this closely (both of you J) might have wondered if I’d fallen off the face of the planet or if I had suddenly got really, really busy. I’ll claim the latter, though sometimes it feels like the former. The bad news, I suppose, is that the near future doesn’t look much better. I’ve still got too many jobs and not enough hours to do them in.

But in the midst of my personal craziness, I’ve compiled a list of things I really need to write about. For instance, I finally got around to outlining and submitting a book proposal for Why Your Small Groups Don’t Change Lives … And What To Do About It. The first chapter can be found in the next two issues of Net Results magazine (the May–June, 2009 and July–August 2009 issues). I need to write the missing steps to living the one-anothers, AKA Getting Past “I’m sorry.” There’s something about first-time church visitors feeling like they’re wearing a sombrero on their birthday at a Mexican restaurant while the all the patrons stare at them and sing “Happy Birthday” that is demanding my attention. And I’ve got what seems to be about a dozen more calling out to me. All in my spare time.

However, in an earlier comment, a reader asked if I had thoughts about tracking everyone who attends worship, specifically how to do that. I’ll address the how in a moment, but before I do I want to address the why.

Attendance tracking is, admittedly, a pain. This is true in small churches where the charter members who have been there since sand refuse to fill out those “silly cards” because “everyone” knows if they’re there or not. And it’s a pain in very large churches where a couple thousand cards get filled in each week – and that’s a LOT of paperwork to have to deal with.

The typical “solution” for both ends of the scale has been to try to get the visitors and guests to sign the registration pads, or cards, or whatever. If the church leadership are sharp, they’ll recognize that the power of suggestion when everyone else is filling out a “prayer and communication” card helps get guests to surrender their contact information. Convincing “everyone” to fill out those cards can be daunting, but the increase in getting first-time guest’s to give up their contact info is generally worth it.

I’ve said enough about follow-up in previous posts, in Net Results, in the On Track E-zine that I should hardly have to say anything. But for those who may have missed it, the research still says that a guest has more than an 85 percent chance of returning if the pastor visits within twenty-four hours of their initial visit – and the percent drops like a rock with each passing day. So, obviously, the first reason for gathering attendance tracking records is to connect with first time and returning guests.

I want to add an additional word about follow-up for those of you who lead larger churches. The reality appears to be that the larger the church, the less likely there is an effective follow-up practice. Clearly, the larger the church the more work follow-up becomes. In fact, it can seem overwhelming and I suppose that’s why so few large churches do much more than dash off the mail-merge “We’re so glad you joined us this week, your presence made all the difference” (as if!). I wonder if church leaders think their guest are as naïve as they treat them? Do they not think the guest is singularly unimpressed by the impersonal and less-than-welcoming welcome letter? And of course, from that point on the guest will receive unsolicited advertising for the church’s upcoming events.

I’m curious, though. How did these churches get that large? In most cases it was because the lead pastor was serious about follow-up and helping newcomers connect. They did the work of reaching out. But when the church gets “large” that becomes a thing of the past because the pastor is, truly, too busy “running a church” to do follow-up on his/her own. And so, it appears that in most cases, the onus of connecting is shifted from the church’s list of responsibility to that of the guest. If a guest wants to be a part of the church, they’ll have to do the connecting on their own. I suppose the presumed trade off is that the large church now offers really great programming and that’s so attractive that guests will jump at the chance to get involved. Hmm. I wonder if that’s one of the many reasons large churches discover they’re “leaking” participants. They come in the front door, fail to really connect, and then make their way back out via the revolving door.

Guest tracking is a pain. Did I mention that? It’s work. An active, healthy church “should” see between a 3–5 percent visitor count (three to five first time visitors for every hundred in attendance). In a church of 1000 AWA, that means thirty to fifty new folks on any given week. That’s simply too much for any individual, but a follow-up team of ten could handle that in about an hour on Sunday afternoon. Yes, the larger the church, the larger the follow-up team you’ll need. Plus you’ll probably want to want to work a database for tracking returning guests for further follow-up (your follow-up process should walk a guest from first visit to a discipleship or ministry group).

But what about tracking all your members? Is there value in that? The fact is, there shouldn’t be, but sadly for many churches, there probably is. In an effective, healthy church, 100 percent of the church’s leadership (from board members to committee chairs to Sunday school teachers) would be expected to be in a small group. Because of their example, the membership at large, would be involved in small groups as well. These small groups would be more than just a Bible study, but would be close-knit communities of faith who took care of each other. If someone “missed” a weekly get together, the group would know why or they’d find out.

However, the fact is, most churches are neither effective nor healthy. The church that has over 50 percent of their participants in small groups is a rarity, and those who have over 70 percent in small groups are writing books about how they’re doing it. And so, tracking membership can have significant advantages. For one, if your congregation has a pastoral visitation team, knowing when someone has missed a week or two could trigger a pastoral call (not by the lead pastor, however). There are dozens of shepherding programs that have been designed for congregations just like that. Most of them are borne of great ideas that should work, but in unhealthy or ineffective churches it can be difficult to recruit the requisite number of servant volunteers to get the job done. That’s not to say don’t take it on, but if you want to launch a membership visitation program, know that there are likely underlying issues that (1) makes the program attractive and (2) makes it difficult to implement.

Nonetheless, the solution to the dilemma of membership follow-up is to launch and sustain an effective small group ministry, a feat that you’ll not launch overnight. And until my book on small groups is out, you’ll want to lean on Larry Osborne’s Sticky Church and smallgroups.com for information on how to create effective and multiply a network of small groups (unless you’re up for inviting me to your place to do some training).

On the other hand, if you’re committed to launching an all-membership tracking program, using the prayer and communication cards each week and literally training your congregation to fill them out is one of the only really effective ways of getting the information (if you have an alternative working model, please let me know).

I got an email from a faithful blog reader last week who mentioned I did a good job pointing out the shortcomings of the church, but that there wasn’t much there in terms of what a healthy, functional, faithful, effective congregation looks like. The fact is, it’s a lot easier to find fault with the church – especially in North America because we’re doing so well at being so ineffective. However, my wife reminds me regularly, “You need to move, touch, and inspire,” and the point is well taken. Because, there is a lot to celebrate in the church and there really are healthy churches out there who are doing great things in Jesus’ name. So, for those churches that aspire to greatness in the Kingdom of God, here are five marks off a of an effective congregation.

A Plethora of Invited Guests: There are a number of marks you’ll note in an effective congregation that you won’t find in most churches. One of the key marks is that the worship service (and most other  events) will have a significant number of invited guests in attendance. The surprise isn’t that there are guests, it’s that the congregation is inviting their friends, relatives, acquaintances, neighbors, co-workers, and everyone else they can. It’s not just one or two folks who are doing the inviting … almost everyone is doing the inviting.

What makes these congregations so different from most North American congregations is that the members are excited about what’s happening in the congregation. In fact, the excitement is both palpable and contagious. It’s not that worship is out of this world, though it often is. It’s not that the pastor is a charismatic leader, though s/he may well be. It’s not even that there’s a DNA of inviting embedded within the congregation. The difference is that the participants expect great things to happen and they’re seldom disappointed. There’s an expectation that God is going to show up and lives are going to be transformed. With convictions like that, it’s hard not to invite others to join you in worship.

Congregational Care: Effective congregations genuinely like each other take care of themselves first and foremost. Now, that almost sounds antithetical to what we understand Christianity to be, but that’s because most churches misunderstand the One-Anothers. Jesus was clear that we were to love everybody, but he reminded his followers that just as there are three different “kinds” of love in Greek, there are three very different recipients of our love. He told us to love our enemies, to love our neighbors as ourselves, and to love one another as he loved us.

Notice that the most rigorous level is reserved for the One-Anothers. Even a cursory glance through a concordance shows that the One-Anothers of the New Testament designate our “brothers and sisters” of the faith. If you take the time to compile the list of the One-Another commands you’ll begin to understand what I mean by this second mark of an effective congregation.

Congregations that take the One-Anothers seriously don’t need pastoral care staff members … nor do they expect the pastor to visit them when they stub their toe. Effective congregations nearly swarm one another with care whenever there’s a need. In effective congregations, no one’s depending on the church office to keep them apprised of who’s in the hospital or who’s a shut in. Small group networks, Sunday school classes, women’s and men’s groups, etc. take personal responsibility for their members. And it’s not just illness or deaths that mobilize these groups. If a member is moving, the pickup trucks and strong backs show up almost without warning. If someone loses their job, the group digs deep to make sure the mortgage is met … and folks step up to help them in their job search.

But there’s more to this than just taking care of one another in times of crisis. Effective congregations have members who get along so well that they spend time together outside of sanctioned church events. They have coffee together, go to the movies together, and generally hang out together (but not to the exclusion of the unconnected … more about that later).  If you want to see a biblical picture of how effective churches care for each other, take a look at Acts 2–4. Effective churches look like that.

And just in case you missed it in between the lines, effective churches don’t manage their conflict. They deal with it. They don’t tolerate bullies, terrorists, guerilla warfare, or unresolved issues. Because of this, the spiritual climate of the church is clear, calm, and centered.

Regular Influx of Spontaneous Guests: Earlier I mentioned that one of the marks of an effective church is the plethora of invited guests. These aren’t the only guests, though. Effective churches get a reputation in the community. For one, the aforementioned excited church members create a buzz virtually everywhere they go. But in addition, effective congregations do an excellent job of letting the community know it exists. Some of this is through mass marketing and word of mouth marketing, but more often the church’s involvement in a signature ministry gets them a widespread positive reputation in the community.  This signature ministry isn’t necessarily an outreach mission, such as a food bank or homeless shelter. Often a signature ministry is simply a single ministry, such as children’s ministries or under thirty’s worship, that is so excellent the community takes notice.

There’s another reason that visitors just “show up” in effective churches. Because the  congregation is so welcoming, these churches get a reputation of being a “safe” place to drop in and test the waters. That means that effective churches allow those guests who want to be anonymous to come and go unscathed by public identification or being assaulted by forced hand-holding. But it also means that even these “shy” guests get first class treatment through the congregation’s hospitality.  If there’s a congregational greeting time, the members don’t engage in a contest based on how many palms they can press. Instead, they spend time intentionally getting to know those they don’t know, whether the “new” friend is a long term member or a first-time guest. There are literally dozens of other hospitality practices – from eschewing coded or religious gobbledygook to providing excellent signage and a sanitary, safe, and secure nursery. 

Effective churches have a reputation that extends beyond its membership and draws visitors like recess draws school kids.

Spontaneous Congregational Ministry: One of the key marks of an effective congregation is the spontaneous launching of congregational ministries. These ministries may be programmatic in nature, but more often than not they are simply intentional responses to the needs of both the congregation and the community.

One example of spontaneous congregational ministry is the five guy Bible study group at one of our local coffee shops. They were overheard talking about a local family who had lost their home to a fire the day before. They’d discovered the family had lost everything and was moving into an apartment. One of the guys mentioned they should buy some food for the family. They all ponied up some cash and another guy suggested they call some of the church members to donate furniture items. Within ten minutes, these five guys at a coffee shop Bible study had mobilized not only themselves, but the whole congregation. The cool thing is, this local church not only encourages such action, they see this kind of thing happening on a near-daily basis.

Regular Adult Baptisms: Here’s the bottom line and THE key mark of an effective congregation. Adult baptisms. This is not a slam against those of you who are Methodist, Catholic, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, etc. who do infant baptism. Infant baptism typically represents biological church growth. However, adult baptisms represent something altogether different. Adult baptisms represent conversion growth. In the West, one of the fastest growing populations is the “never churched” population. We’re in the third generation of a largely unchurched population: the Boomers quit church; Gen-X only went to church when grandma took them; and the Pre-Millennials have never been to church (of course this is a broad generalization, but the fact is, it’s generally true). And so, effective churches are engaged in real evangelism that is touching real lives and that results in adult baptisms.

If your church isn’t doing any adult baptisms, the reality is that you can probably take a look at your decadal attendance and membership figures, plot them, and speculate moderately accurately when you will no longer be a viable congregation.

So, there you are. The five marks of an effective congregation. Are there other marks? Sure. Lack of ongoing conflict, mission focused, decision making teams versus committees, and so on. But the fact is, if you have the five that are listed, you’re probably doing all the rest by default.

I received so many responses to my last post on the Top Five Reasons Churches Don’t Grow that I could probably blog a new post on any one of the comments and have almost a month’s worth of writing.

However, a comment from TF brought back a flood of thoughts that I thought I’d share. His/her question was about whether there could be “unspoken” conflict in a church – and that the pastor maintained a mantra of the importance of unity rather than dealing with unresolved and unspoken conflict. You know, you don’t want to open that “can of worms.”

Unspoken conflict, which is a euphemism for unresolved conflict, is literally killing churches. Indeed, many churches operate under an illusion of “unity and harmony.” The congregation, particularly the leadership, make heroic attempts to cover up, tuck under their sleeves, and practice mis-direction and sleight of hand to try and convince the “audience” that all is well. It’s much like Jeremiah’s comment that they say “Peace, Peace” when there is no peace. Let me be less than nice for a moment and call it like it is. Congregational leaders who are making these attempts are guilty of promulgating and perpetuating a lie – and a congregation that is living a lie isn’t likely to be visited with many blessings. Those of the congregation who are a part of the unspoken, unresolved conflict need to take seriously Paul’s admonition in 2 Corinthians 13:5 (”Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves.”). I refuse to enter a debate about the definition of a Christian, but someone who claims to be a Christ follower who doesn’t behave like a Christian, who either refuses to reconcile with another or who perpetuates a lie isn’t likely to pass the 2 Cor 13:5 test.

So, here’s the thing. If you’re a part of a congregation that refuses to deal with unresolved conflict … if your leadership continues to indulge in the fantasy and delusion that conflict will resolve itself if left alone … and if you’ve approached leadership about the issue (you’re held to Matthew 18:15-17 too) and have been blown off, then it’s time for you to find a congregation that’s not living a lie.

If you’re a part of the conflict, whether it’s your fault or not, it’s time to put your discipleship into action. Put Matthew 5:23-24 or Matthew 18:15-17 into practice.

And if you’re a leader who’s helping to “smooth over” unresolved conflict and you’re not getting any results, step up and be a leader … put Matthew 18:15-17 into play from the first “If” to the last “then.” If that means the church loses a couple of members, then so be it. To paraphrase one of Jesus’ sayings, “Better to lose a church member than the whole body to be cast out.”