Consulting, Coaching & Chatter

The first, and typically most transformative spiritual habit, is surprisingly scripture reading. I’m fond of saying “I’m a scientist’s son and a Mainliner at heart,” so when I tell church leaders that if they’ll just start reading scripture regularly their lives will be transformed, they sometimes look at me as if I was from a different planet. I don’t know what it is … I can’t explain it … but here’s what I’ve experienced over the years. If I can get the church leaders to start reading the Bible, the remaining steps to affecting sustainable church transformation are significantly easier.

Following a recent Congregational Coaching training event, the president of the council complained to the pastor: “Coach Bill seems to think that our church will grow if we just all start reading the Bible.” Of course his words bordered on overstatement – but only just. Three months later when I returned for their next training event I was approached by no fewer than three council members who each relayed how the council president had changed. He was more focused and patient, he listened more, and he was more open to hearing alternative view points. What brought on the transformation? According to him, it was when he started reading the Bible.

But there’s a counterpoint to my tale. I was introduced to a couple who shared they had a habit of reading from Proverbs each day. Since Proverbs has thirty-one chapters, they read the chapter corresponding to the day of the month. Now, I suspect that once upon a time their practice was transformative, but years later they were mired in Proverbs and expressed their reservations about the transformative value of scripture reading. Although Proverbs is a great book filled with witticisms and wisdom, perhaps immersion in the words of Christ and the Gospels themselves might be a wiser choice, at least for travel on the transformative road.

It’s been said that variety is the spice of life, but when it comes to transformative scripture reading, too much variety will stunt your spiritual growth and too little variety will starve you. Here are the basic guidelines I offer to the church leaders I work with.

• Choose a version of the Bible that is (1) easy to read and understand, and (2) isn’t one you’re so familiar with that it’s become stale. If you’re unfamiliar with The Message, it offers a fresh perspective that will help you see the stories and instructions in a new light.
• Start in the Gospel of Mark. It’s the shortest of the Gospels, it’s face paced, and you’ll get better acquainted with the guy who’s name you carry. I tend to recommend reading Luke or Matthew next, followed by the book of Acts. After that, when asked, I invite folks to read pretty much whatever seems to call their name, but that they revisit the Gospels at least four times a year, the book of Acts at least twice a year, and read the rest of the scriptures at a ratio of two New Testament books to every one Old Testament book. Nothing magical about the ratios – it just seems wise to invest in getting to know the author of the faith and the practices of the first century church.
• Read whatever book you choose from the beginning to the end (not necessarily in one sitting!). Context is everything and if you read the book in the manner the author intended, it will make better sense.
• Read logically. Read logical “chunks” of a book. In other words, don’t let the chapters or verses be the master of where you start and end reading. “Versification” was added long after the Bible was compiled and many chapters and verses seem to have been placed randomly. Read chunks of scripture that include complete stories or topics.
• Read reflectively. I’ve found there are two primary Bible reading styles. First, there are those who read the scriptures so carefully and deliberately that it may take them a month to get through the four paragraph book of Jude . These folks may be missing the big picture. On the other hand, there are those who read the Bible as if it’s a novel they can’t put down. These may miss subtle nuances. If you have to err on one side or the other, read more quickly. We’re finding that those who are biblically “conversant” often fare better in conversations with non-Christians than those who can cite chapter and verse.
• Read regularly. If you or your church leaders aren’t reading at all at this point (or rather rarely), any scripture reading is better than no scripture reading. For a new reader, reading the Bible weekly is alright. Reading a couple times a week is better, but the reality is that reading a chunk or two daily (or more) is best. Remember, it’s not how much scripture you get through, it’s how much scripture that gets through you.

Finally, how do you get your leaders to start reading? Ask them the first Discipleship Development accountability question: “What did you read in scripture this week that intrigued you?” It typically takes three to four consecutive weeks of asking, but if you’re faithful in your query, you’ll generally be rewarded with a positive response. In fact, I’ve never had to ask small group members more than four weeks in row before 100 percent are reading scripture every week. And if you get your leaders reading scripture, before you know it, you’ll notice a change in your leadership culture.

Although my book High-Voltage Spirituality is a compendium of forty-eight different spiritual habits (disciplines), in practice I maintain there are five core spiritual habits that provide a foundation for personal maturity and church growth.

And so it was with a mix of horror and relief when I was informed my book High-Voltage Spirituality was going out of print. Horror because I realized that I hadn’t been talking about spiritual disciplines as much on other topics. With a core belief that sustainable transformation is only possible when church leaders are committed to spiritual formation, I realized I’d lately been putting cart before horse. On the other hand, relief came when I realized that the Kindle version will still be available, and that we’ll be able to directly offer the PDF version on our sites.

And so, as a first-step to rectifying my recent lapse, I present the foundational five core habits. Practice these yourself and watch life fall into place. Get your leadership to practice these and watch your church embrace transformation. Over the next couple of days, I’ll post on each habit separately and there I’ll share details on how to practice the habits effectively and offer observations on what happens in churches when the leaders collectively begin to practice them.

The five core spiritual habits are:

• Personal, Regular Scripture Reading
• Prayer that Listens More than Talks
• Intentionally Encouraging Other Christians
• Kindnesses Done in Jesus’ Name
• Personal Faith Sharing

In my experience, the list order provides a progression from those habits that most aid personal transformation to those habits that most aid church transformation. Sort of. Without the personal transformation of the leaders, congregational transformation simply isn’t going to happen. The church might grow by having excellent programming or an extraordinary marketing budge, but it won’t be sustainable growth – and it won’t transform the lives of those who come to taste-and-see. If leaders aren’t spiritually transformed, it’s a virtual guarantee wanderers (seekers/guests) won’t be either.

The next five posts will explore each spiritual habit in detail.

I received a thoughtful note from a Church-Talk listener. He contended that the church has fallen under the spell of the culture’s understanding and practice of leadership. He went on the say that the church must follow the leadership of the Holy Spirit rather than fallen mortal man. I thought he was pretty perceptive in his observation – but that there’s more to the story. So, below is my response.

It is true that in the New Testament the word for Leader or Leadership occurs rarely – in fact, only eight times, and five of those times it has less to do with church leadership and more with leading households or leading in “good works” (see http://www.jbc.edu/college/images/churchrelations/churchlink/PDFs/Linton-Prohistemi.pdf).  On the other hand, the word “pastor” only occurs once – and that in the list of church “offices” in Eph 4:11 – though there are other words used to describe those in church “leadership” such as elders/presbyters/bishops.

And though the words “leader” and “pastor” are notably absent in the New Testament, the focus on Followership is predominant. Jesus repeatedly called one person after another to follow him. Later, Paul took up that mantle and on repeated occasions (and five quite blatantly) he says “Follow me” – including once when he instructs “Follow me as I follow Christ.”

However, that brings up an important distinction. By definition, a leader is someone who has followers, and although the New Testament focus is on “following,” followers by definition are following a leader (formally or informally).

Jesus was expressly clear that those who lead (in the church?) should not “lord it over one another as the Gentiles do” (Mat 20:25-26). Leadership in the church, when it’s finely exegeted and understood in context, is a lot more about mentoring, modeling, and serving and a lot less about barking orders.

Which is the paradigm we work from in Net Results, Church-Talk, and the 21^st Century Strategies: effective leaders lead as mentors and models of discipleship. Further, we firmly believe that poor leadership in mentoring and modeling are the primary reasons the church in North America is in serious decline. Far too many pastors and church leaders are involved in management and administration rather in disciple-making and conspicuously living the faith.

Once again, the New Testament, and especially the book of Acts, illustrates what the church “could” look like. The leaders were busy making disciples (both more and more effective) and the “congregation,” that is everyone else, was active in doing direct, hands-on ministries (practicing personal worship, one-anothering, reaching out to the unchurched, and discipleship/holding accountable). And though the leadership of the Holy Spirit is a key feature in Acts, the leading of the Spirit was through the head, heart, and hands of those who served in leadership (particularly demonstrated and seen in the leadership of Peter, Paul, and Timothy).

The problem with the church is that it is, and always has been, made up of fallen people (as if it could be any other way). Whether these people serve as a leader or as a disciple (a fine biblical word that once again implies followership), each is called to hold one-another accountable in the practice of the faith (see Jesus’ model of accountability throughout Matthew’s gospel, e.g., Mat 5:22-23; 18:15-17). But ultimately, a local church without those serving in a leadership capacity (whether we call that office using the New Testament terms pastor, elder, presbyter, or bishop) is a church with a rudder, but one without anyone holding on to it.

It happened again recently. I was in a large group of mainline church leaders who professed their interest in church transformation. We were all milling around the room waiting for the convener to launch the meeting and the conversation was pensive. Then the “transformational church leader” stood up, thanked us for coming, and said, “We’re gathered here to talk about church transformation … just us who are on the front lines … no church consultants.” There was a spontaneous spattering of applause, vigorous nods of heads, and a collective sigh of relief. No church consultants … you know, those men and women who have not only dedicated their lives to helping transform the church, but who have invested research, education, observation, and ongoing training to their vocation.

The conversation continued with the convener helping the members of the group get to know each other and their respective strengths. “What I want to do, is start a grass roots movement where we pool our resources to bring about church transformation. For instance, Pastor XYZ has a great worship service, so if you need help working through worship issues, you should call him.” And so it went until the room was introduced to a pool of “resources” who were decidedly not consultants but who knew a bit out one specialty or another.

Sounds good, doesn’t it? Perhaps it could be the foundation for a new economical transformational movement.

But it’s not new. Denominations, middle judicatories, and the frustrated masses have been trying this model of church transformation as long as I’ve been alive … and research says it’s been happening way longer than that. And what have been the results of these grass roots movements?

I’ve wrestled with how to put this gently, but the above story has been repeated in my life too many times to be “nice.” As nice as the people were in that room, and as well intentioned as the convener was, the fact is that pooled ignorance does not transform churches. For instance, Pastor XYZ really does do a nice job in worship. But Pastor XYZ’s church is in decline nonetheless. In fact, there didn’t appear to be a representative breakthrough church in the room.

There is more to church transformation than a great worship, awesome children’s programming, or even effective conflict resolution. Although each of these is needed for a successful church turnaround, they are not the core of a turnaround. Ask any consultant.

But wait … there’s more. Some time ago I offered a word of coaching on an open listServ on church growth. Even if I say so myself, the advice I presented was spot on, but within a few minutes of my post came a response, “Although I appreciate what you may have to say, I’m really looking for advice from someone who’s ‘done it,’ not just a consultant.” Of course, the writer had no idea whether I’d ever “done” it or not, but since I was a church consultant I was immediately suspect.

Now, let me say that there is some wisdom in the writer’s words. There are indeed consultants and coaches out there who made the move because it seemed easier than working in the church, but who have no transformation experience whatsoever. However, most church consultants have a bit more integrity than that … and significantly more experience.

But when it comes to calling a pastor who’s “done it,” let me remind you that just because someone has transformed a church doesn’t mean they can coach, consult, or indeed replicate what they’ve done. I’m reminded of the great sports players in my life. Bart Starr was my childhood football idol: quarterback for the Green Bay Packers and if memory serves me, still holds a couple of records. Later on, he was hired as Green Bay’s coach. There is really only one word to describe his work there: disaster. Then there’s Michael Jordan, one of the greatest basketball players of all time, but as coach of the Wizards? Dismal. Here’s the reality. Some players go on to become fabulous coaches, but there’s a HUGE difference between a player and a coach.

A mainline pastor who has led his/her church into transformation has done a marvelous thing – and has accomplished something that ends in failure in 80 percent of our churches (and the number appears to be closer to a 90 percent failure rate in the mainline). I want to say up front that any church leader who has led the transformation of a church is my personal hero. Period. But as much of a hero as they are, as talented and gifted as they are, in many, if not most cases, their success was built in a particular context in a particular time with a particular congregation. Put that church leader in another church – in fact, in most churches – and they’ll be battling the 80 percent average. Don’t get me wrong, there are few folks out there who have been successful at multiple transformations. Indeed, I only personally know of one – and he’s an unsung hero who hasn’t written five paragraphs of how he’s done it … yet (I’m after him for a Net Results article, but he’s pretty busy with his current “project”).

Now, I’m not suggesting that you shouldn’t be getting input from a church leader who’s led a successful transformation. By all means, go have lunch with him/her. Listen to their story and seek their advice. But before you jump into a transformation effort based on what they’ve done, let me remind you that neither you nor I are a Schuler, Hybels, Kalstadt, Warren, Slaughter, Olstein, Easum, Chan, or McManus. You and I are who we are and trying to duplicate someone else’s success formula will almost certainly put a congregation in the 80 percent group.

There’s a difference between an experienced and trained coach/consultant and someone who’s “done” it: Experience and Training. Whereas the local church leader who’s accomplished the near-impossible has the experience of a success, an experienced consultant comes with a broader perspective (which is also one of the drawbacks of most judicatory staff consultants – they may have experience with multiple congregations, but they have limited experience with the broader scope of church transformation). For instance, when Bill Easum is called to work with a congregation, he comes with a span of experience that’s broader than virtually any other practicing consultant. He’s worked with scores of denominations and has personally consulted with hundreds of congregations (nearly a thousand) of all shape, sizes, locations, etc. In my own case, I’ve led transformation work as the lead pastor in three mainline denominations (UMC, PCUSA, CCDOC) and done church planting in three (SBC, CCDOC, and non-denominational). Plus I’ve worked with dozens of churches as a coach, consultant, and in transformational leadership training.

The second difference is training. Let’s be perfectly honest here. Seminary training does not prepare a church leader for transformation. PhD training does not prepare a church leader for transformation. And few DMin programs prepare a church leader for transformation. Now, I’ll agree that book-study hardly prepares someone for much, and any consultant who finishes his/her DMin in coaching or transformation and hangs out a shingle without an apprenticeship or internship with an experienced church consultation firm is, in general, ill-prepared for the job. On the other hand, I know far too many “consultants” and “coaches” who have taken a course or two and immediately began circulating proposals and fine-looking brochures to judicatory offices and started working their networks to establish themselves in the field. Give them enough time and experience they may do alright, but I know of too many congregations that have been left bereft in the name of experience of some of these “consultants.” In this economy we’re seeing a lot of these folks having to return to the parish because they just couldn’t get the experience and the traction in their new career path they’d counted on.

Consultants that match their personal experience with an apprenticeship/internship and training are virtually always better prepared to walk with churches through the transformational, church planting, and transformational leadership training mine fields. Besides a DMin in Church Planting Movements, as the Managing Editor of Net Results I’ve been in the student seat for a lot of years. Both Bill Easum and I are regular attendees at national church planting and transformational training events – often as speakers, but we also attend workshops and seminars to keep up-to-date with the broadest possible opportunities.

So, the next time you hear someone say, “I want to hear the opinion of someone who’s done it,” bear in mind that the speaker hasn’t really thought through their comment. It’s good to hear from someone who’s done it, but it’s better to hire someone who both has done it and has a breadth of knowledge and resources well beyond the reach of the 20 percenters.

In difficult times, churches have a tendency to clap shut their shutters, hide their money under mattresses, and delay anything that might be innovative and new – especially if it costs more than a nickle. Okay, so I exaggerate. A little. But the reality is that when the economy or the political winds turn fierce, churches tend to put on their most conservative faces and practices, and I don’ t mean theologically (though I guess some of that too). Amidst those practices, the church often defaults to it’s oldest and wisest leaders for direction for almost everything. Decisions are made carefully, thoughtfully, and conservatively lest the actions make the situation even worse than it is.

And yet, these are the very best times to test the mettle and buff the rough edges from new and future leaders. It’s been said that no one learns to be great by success – only in failure. And though the possibility of adding failure to the already tough times seems counterintuitive, the risk is well worth the potential, especially when there’s so much to gain. Since most churches have been in a decade slump in terms of attendance, membership, and finances, the risk level of empowering new leadership seems relatively low. What do we really have to lose? What most churches are doing now hasn’t been working for awhile.

One regularly expressed concerns is that it’s difficult to raise up new leaders. Although this may be a legitimate concern, often the reality is that new leaders are unwilling to step up because they do not expect to have the space to lead as God leads them. Indeed, some potential leaders have tried to lead, only to have current leaders step up to micromanage the project, to criticize the way the project is being handled, or to complain that they weren’t consulted, invited, or honored. When this kind of treatment happens once, the word spreads quickly … when it happens repeatedly, it becomes virtually impossible to raise up new leaders.

Letting go of leadership is difficult. There are power issues involved. Personal feelings are involved. Tradition is involved. No matter what, getting current leaders to step back enough to allow new leadership is difficult, and yet that is what’s called for – especially in these times. If you’re committed to raising up new leaders, here is a brief bullet list of how to effectively hand over the reigns while limiting the risks of catastrophic failure.

1. Don’t give the new leader a job description, give them mission and vision statements that include expected outcomes. For a new Christian Education Team Leader, a mission and vision might look like this. Mission: “To teach, train, equip, and empower all ages and stages of disciples and would-be disciples of Jesus.” Vision: “Seventy percent of all adults and 100 percent of children and youth participating in some form of effective faith formation opportunities.”
2. Ensure the lines of responsibility are clear. Each new leader of a program or ministry should have a staff member (paid or unpaid) to whom they are responsible for results.
3. Insist that new leaders lead, not just do. If they cannot raise up followers, they are not leaders. All leaders must develop a team in order to accomplish the ministry task.
4. Allow the new leader to develop their own plans. So long as the plan fits into the mission and vision of the church, reflects the congregational values, and does not violate the beliefs and expected behaviors, then the leader should be allowed to strategize, plan, set goals, and implement as needed. However, the use of resources must be coordinated with their staff liaison/church office.
5. The staff liaison should be in conversation with the new leader regularly, and at least monthly for a mentoring and check-in appointment. This meeting should be an encouragement meeting that keeps the motivation high and supports the work of the new leader. Help the leader set reasonable and measurable goals.
6. Above all, do not allow former leaders to rain on the new leader’s parade. The staff liaison should help provide a safety shield around the new leader if necessary.
7. Hold the new leader accountable for results, especially the results that they have set themselves (in #5 above).
8. Remember that failure is a learning opportunity – and is only a failure if the new leader doesn’t pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and start again.

In times like these, the need for our brightest and most innovative is required. By helping new leaders to take the reigns, the church can make the most of this leadership training school paradise.

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.

The stats aren’t pretty. In fact, they’re pretty deplorable. But they’re nonetheless accurate. Eighty percent of all Pastoral Size to Program Size church transformations fail – 80 percent. A Pastoral Sized church is one in which the pastor is essentially the end-all, be-all of the congregational expectations. They attend virtually every function and event. They facilitate virtually every meeting. And, in general, they plan everything the church is going to do. These pastors do almost all of the visiting of the sick, the infirm, the homebound, new visitors to the church, and membership in general. They’re busy bodies (as opposed to busybodies).These churches tend to have between 100 and 150 people in worship.

The Program Sized church is one in which the programs of the church are the end-all, be all. These
programs are overseen by teams or committees. The pastor’s role is to equip and support these leaders in doing ministry. This is the first level of the church where, in general, the pastor gets serious with the role of the pastor as defined in Ephesians 4:11-13 … the ministry of the pastor is to equip the church to do the ministry of the church, not the other way around (as is often the practice in Pastoral and Family sized churches).

The reason most of these transformations fail is that congregation’s core values in most North American churches, especially in churches that have been “stuck” at less that 150 for the last five or more years, is (1) Comfort and (2) Status Quo. In other words, “This is my church and I just want to be comfortable.” and “I don’t want to change … and I especially don’t want my church to change.” With those two core values, it’s practically impossible to transform a church – for obvious reasons.

But 20 percent of churches that attempt the Pastoral to Program sized transformations succeed. What’s different about them? I leave you with a bullet list of differences. The question is, where is your church on the list?

• The pain of remaining the same outweighs the pain of change. It’s amazing what desperation will drive you to.
• The pastor is committed to seeing the transformation through … regardless of the pain.
• The congregation is committed to seeing the transformation through … regardless of how much a pain their pastor is.
• The congregation quickly develops and adopts expected behaviors and their full DNA.
• There is little ongoing conflict, and no serious conflict.
• Bullies and Terrorists are either converted, neutralized, or shown to the door.
• The pastor has a coach and a mentor … and is both coachable and teachable.
• The congregation’s leaders are committed to developing their spiritual maturity – even if they’re already spiritual giants, they know they have further to go.
• The congregation and the pastor all have this attitude: “It’s all about God. This is God’s church, not mine, and God is willing to do ANYTHING, even going to his death on a cross, to reach the lost in the neighborhood. Because God is willing, I will follow.”