A few weeks ago I went to a meeting with mega-church leaders and micro-church leaders. There were about 50 key leaders in attendance; some were from the largest churches in America (all over 5000 in attendance), and some from the smallest churches in America – house churches, small groups and cells. And then there was me. As a network, CTK is small and large at the same time. The meeting lasted two days, talking about how big churches can support little churches, and vice-versa. But the conversation was largely superficial, until the very last hour, when something really significant happened.
One of the micro church pastors turned to one of the mega-church pastors and asked, “What do you need from us? What do you want from the house church?” Without skipping a beat, this mega church pastor said, “Grace....We need grace. Quit throwing stones at the mega church. Quit launching grenades. We need grace. We love people and want to see them become followers of Christ. We just do it in a different way than you. We need grace.” Up until that point there was an elephant in the room. We were talking about how to work together, but we did’t much like each other.
Let’s be clear: before we can get the work done with our hands, we need to get the work done in our hearts. We are here to experience and express the grace of God. There is no question that we have experienced grace. The question is, "Will we express it?" As I was thinking about what happened in that room between those two pastors the word that came into my mind – maybe a synonym for grace - was validation. It is incumbent upon members of the body to validate other members of the body. What that large church pastor was saying, in essence, was, "I need you to validate my ministry." And if the shoe would have been put on the different foot it would have fit. Small church pastors are longing to be validated by large church pastors.
We sometimes try to do city-wide events with other churches, some in hopes that the world will see that we are united. But the world does not see us as divided because we don't do events together. The world sees us as divided because we talk smack about each other. There’s a need for us to look at what others are doing and say, “Isn’t that great!” As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12:21: The eye cannot say to the hand, "I don't need you!" And the head cannot say to the feet, "I don't need you!" God works in different ways at different times and places. In fact it's not way, it's ways. All the time we spend trying to figure out which one "way" God is at work is dissipated waste. God is the head of the body. He is at work in various ways in people’s lives.
One of the long-standing challenges with Christianity is that however God is at work in our story, we imagine that that is the only way God could be at work in another story. We need to fall in love with the master and the mission, not the model or the method. Let me suggest 3 steps we can take to validate those whose ministry is different than yours:
1. Rejoice...in your heart about what God is doing throughout the world. His work is much bigger than us.
2. Recognize...what God is doing throughout the world. Validate the thing that is different than you, maybe opposite of you. For those of us in a church like CTK that is not programmatic, or institutional or traditional, it might mean expressing thanks to the ministries that are programmatic, or institutional or traditional. When was the last time you said, "Thanks."
3. Report...give a good report to others about ministries of other styles in other places. Spread some good gossip. As Ben Franklin said, "Speak ill of no man, but speak all the good you know about everybody."
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Leave
A pastor was telling me about a new group that was forming in his Worship Center. The group was going to be led by Chris (not his real name), who is a former pot-smoker. Some of those coming to the group are going to be people from his old pot circle. The pastor said to me, "There's a part of me that wants to be at these group meetings." He was concerned that he these young adults might slip into their old behaviors if he wasn't present. I told him that I understood his concern but that he should not give into the temptation to baby sit.
Carefully consider the implications to your long-term ministry if you "need to be there" to keep bad things from happening:
First, if you need to be there, you are not displaying a very high level of trust in God's spirit. Before Jesus left earth he told us that he would send his spirit "to be with us forever" and "to guide us into all truth." We need to take God up on his promise. There needs to only be one Holy Spirit. You are not it.
Second, if you need to be there, you are not displaying a very high level of trust in your people. You are saying, "I can't trust you to be outside my sight." Do you want them to lead from inner integrity, or outward compulsion?
Third, if you need to be there, after awhile your volunteer leader will realize that he doesn't need to be there. This is the same challenge foreign missionaries face. When the chips are down, the natives all look at the "white face" in the room. As a pastor your authority and influence will eclipse that of the volunteer. Get out of his way so he can execute his ministry.
Fourth, if you need to be there, you are limiting the scope of your ministry to the places where and times when you can be there. Do you really want to do that? I didn't think so. Most churches in America or less than 75 people, and one of the reasons is that is the number of people that a person can pastor directly. Greater effectiveness is found when a pastor spends more time working on the ministry than in the ministry.
This does not mean that this pastor should not spend time with Chris, mentoring him and supporting him in his ministry. In fact, I would say that there is not a more important meeting on that pastor's calendar. Equipping Chris to do the work of the ministry is precisely what God has called that pastor to do. Just be careful to not cross the line into co-dependency. As a father in the faith you have to let your children go. You have to trust God to keep them from falling.
When you think about it, what was really impressive about the serial-planting ministries of the Apostle Paul or John Wesley is not how may places they went, but how many places they left.
Carefully consider the implications to your long-term ministry if you "need to be there" to keep bad things from happening:
First, if you need to be there, you are not displaying a very high level of trust in God's spirit. Before Jesus left earth he told us that he would send his spirit "to be with us forever" and "to guide us into all truth." We need to take God up on his promise. There needs to only be one Holy Spirit. You are not it.
Second, if you need to be there, you are not displaying a very high level of trust in your people. You are saying, "I can't trust you to be outside my sight." Do you want them to lead from inner integrity, or outward compulsion?
Third, if you need to be there, after awhile your volunteer leader will realize that he doesn't need to be there. This is the same challenge foreign missionaries face. When the chips are down, the natives all look at the "white face" in the room. As a pastor your authority and influence will eclipse that of the volunteer. Get out of his way so he can execute his ministry.
Fourth, if you need to be there, you are limiting the scope of your ministry to the places where and times when you can be there. Do you really want to do that? I didn't think so. Most churches in America or less than 75 people, and one of the reasons is that is the number of people that a person can pastor directly. Greater effectiveness is found when a pastor spends more time working on the ministry than in the ministry.
This does not mean that this pastor should not spend time with Chris, mentoring him and supporting him in his ministry. In fact, I would say that there is not a more important meeting on that pastor's calendar. Equipping Chris to do the work of the ministry is precisely what God has called that pastor to do. Just be careful to not cross the line into co-dependency. As a father in the faith you have to let your children go. You have to trust God to keep them from falling.
When you think about it, what was really impressive about the serial-planting ministries of the Apostle Paul or John Wesley is not how may places they went, but how many places they left.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Sprint
This from Seth Godin (I like how this guy's mind works!):
The best way to overcome your fear of creativity, brainstorming, intelligent risk taking or navigating a tricky situation might be to sprint.
When we sprint, all the internal dialogue falls away and we just go as fast as we possibly can. When you're sprinting you don't feel that sore knee and you don't worry that the ground isn't perfectly level. You just run.
You can't sprint forever. That's what makes it sprinting. The brevity of the event is a key part of why it works.
"Quick, you have thirty minutes to come up with ten business ideas."
"Hurry, we need to write a new script for our commercial... we have fifteen minutes."
My first huge project was launching a major brand of science-fiction computer adventure games (Ray Bradbury, Michael Crichton, etc.). I stopped going to business school classes in order to do the launch.
One day, right after a red eye flight, the president of the company told me that the company had canceled the project. They didn't have enough resources to launch all the products we had, our progress was too slow and the packaging wasn't ready yet.
I went to my office spent the next 20 hours rewriting every word of text, redesigning every package, rebuilding every schedule and inventing a new promotional strategy. It was probably 6 weeks of work for a motivated committee, and I did it in one swoop. Like lifting a car off an infant, it was impossible, and I have no recollection at all of the project now.
The board reconsidered and the project was back on again. I didn't get scared untilafter the sprint. You can't sprint every day but it's probably a good idea to sprint regularly.
The best way to overcome your fear of creativity, brainstorming, intelligent risk taking or navigating a tricky situation might be to sprint.
When we sprint, all the internal dialogue falls away and we just go as fast as we possibly can. When you're sprinting you don't feel that sore knee and you don't worry that the ground isn't perfectly level. You just run.
You can't sprint forever. That's what makes it sprinting. The brevity of the event is a key part of why it works.
"Quick, you have thirty minutes to come up with ten business ideas."
"Hurry, we need to write a new script for our commercial... we have fifteen minutes."
My first huge project was launching a major brand of science-fiction computer adventure games (Ray Bradbury, Michael Crichton, etc.). I stopped going to business school classes in order to do the launch.
One day, right after a red eye flight, the president of the company told me that the company had canceled the project. They didn't have enough resources to launch all the products we had, our progress was too slow and the packaging wasn't ready yet.
I went to my office spent the next 20 hours rewriting every word of text, redesigning every package, rebuilding every schedule and inventing a new promotional strategy. It was probably 6 weeks of work for a motivated committee, and I did it in one swoop. Like lifting a car off an infant, it was impossible, and I have no recollection at all of the project now.
The board reconsidered and the project was back on again. I didn't get scared untilafter the sprint. You can't sprint every day but it's probably a good idea to sprint regularly.
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Inside
We all want people who are not currently involved to become involved. There are some sophisticated words, like assimilation, to describe the process. But it basically comes down to getting "outsiders" to become "insiders." There are some very particular things you need to do to help people transition from outside to inside:
1. Roster. If you do not have a roster, there is no way to know who is "part" of your program to begin with, so it will be impossible to have someone who is not part of it become part of it. A roster is elementary, but necessary. Who is a part of your ministry, or your small group? Put the names on a list. Distribute the list to the participants so that they know they are "officially" participating. Post the list so that others can see who is already involved. This now creates the possibility that you can add more names to the list and move them from outside to inside.
2. Meetings. Meetings are critical to assimilation as a point of reinforcement for those involved, and a point of entry for those who are not. Everyone should know when the next meeting is going to happen, so if they encounter someone who would like to "join" they can invite them to the next meeting. By attending the meeting the newbie gets put on the list, and becomes an insider.
3. Introductions. A key leadership role is the role of introducing new participants to existing participants. "Tie" people together by giving both sides some basic information. You may want to subjugate your agenda and just let everyone share their story when you have a new person in attendance. This will fast-track the relationships and make people feel that they are being known by others and knowing others, which is the essence of community.
4. Acknowledgment. Participants need to be acknowledged. If someone is a part of your ministry, but is never highlighted for what they are doing, they can start to feel invisible and wonder, "Am I really a part of something, or am I just imagining that I am." Send out congratulations for a job well done. Post a hall of fame. Give away awards. Even newcomers should be celebrated in some way. Acknowlegment can't help but create tighter connections.
5. Communication. Between meetings there needs to be regular correspondence. It could be a newsletter. It could be an email. It could be a blog. But people want to know that you care about them, and not just for what they can do for you or the group. Build the relationships offline.
6. Prayer. At every gathering pray for others to join your group. In a small group setting we sometimes call this "praying over the empty chair." The empty chair represents someone that we want to love in Jesus' name. Praying for newcomers accomplishes a couple things: a) It keeps the priority of outreach foremost in participants minds, and helps them to hold the ministry loosely, b) it helps newcomers to know that they are loved and wanted, and not unwelcome intruders.
1. Roster. If you do not have a roster, there is no way to know who is "part" of your program to begin with, so it will be impossible to have someone who is not part of it become part of it. A roster is elementary, but necessary. Who is a part of your ministry, or your small group? Put the names on a list. Distribute the list to the participants so that they know they are "officially" participating. Post the list so that others can see who is already involved. This now creates the possibility that you can add more names to the list and move them from outside to inside.
2. Meetings. Meetings are critical to assimilation as a point of reinforcement for those involved, and a point of entry for those who are not. Everyone should know when the next meeting is going to happen, so if they encounter someone who would like to "join" they can invite them to the next meeting. By attending the meeting the newbie gets put on the list, and becomes an insider.
3. Introductions. A key leadership role is the role of introducing new participants to existing participants. "Tie" people together by giving both sides some basic information. You may want to subjugate your agenda and just let everyone share their story when you have a new person in attendance. This will fast-track the relationships and make people feel that they are being known by others and knowing others, which is the essence of community.
4. Acknowledgment. Participants need to be acknowledged. If someone is a part of your ministry, but is never highlighted for what they are doing, they can start to feel invisible and wonder, "Am I really a part of something, or am I just imagining that I am." Send out congratulations for a job well done. Post a hall of fame. Give away awards. Even newcomers should be celebrated in some way. Acknowlegment can't help but create tighter connections.
5. Communication. Between meetings there needs to be regular correspondence. It could be a newsletter. It could be an email. It could be a blog. But people want to know that you care about them, and not just for what they can do for you or the group. Build the relationships offline.
6. Prayer. At every gathering pray for others to join your group. In a small group setting we sometimes call this "praying over the empty chair." The empty chair represents someone that we want to love in Jesus' name. Praying for newcomers accomplishes a couple things: a) It keeps the priority of outreach foremost in participants minds, and helps them to hold the ministry loosely, b) it helps newcomers to know that they are loved and wanted, and not unwelcome intruders.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
With
"With" may be the most important preposition for a Christian leader. Will you do ministry "with"? Who will you do it "with"? Who will do it "with" you?
Many leaders feel alone. I have to admit, I had a serious bout with aloneness at the end of last year. For the most part, I have not dealt with aloneness in ministry, so I probably don't know how to deal with it very well. When it hit, it hit hard. As I have run to the Lord, I have received comfort, and I have also gained some insights:
1. If I choose to do ministry by myself, the Lord will let me. He, of course, promised to be with us to the end of the age. He knows better than we do that we cannot do ministry on our own. He said, "Apart from me you can do nothing." But on the other hand, God is a gentleman, and he does not go where he is not wanted or invited. So if you do not regularly invoke the Lord's presence in your life and take time to be with Him, He will leave you...alone.
There are some things I used to do to be with Him. I am coming back to these things. I used to take Monday's as a "personal work day." On that day I would not schedule meetings or try to "produce" stuff. I would simply take that day to do what I needed to do to be spiritually healthy. I would pray. I would meditate. I would read from the word. I would be "with" Him. During this past year I found it difficult to keep Mondays set aside for Him. This coming year I will find it difficult again, but this year I intend to overcome those difficulties. Being with Him is priority. I simply cannot do ministry without Him. In previous years I used to take one day a month as a day of prayer and fasting. I am going to do that again this year. I have already set aside the days in which I will get away from phones and email and be in solitude with God. I used to take some weekends off from teaching, not to teach somewhere else, but to not teach at all. Every quarter this year I'm going to do it again. Jesus modeled this behavior for us. As the crowds were coming, He was exiting stage left. He knew something that I've known before and am relearning all over again: It's pretty great when we are connected to the vine, and it's pretty lame when we're not.
2. If I choose to do ministry by myself, people will let me. I think I have done a great job of "releasing" people for ministry. But in an ironic twist, when I send them out as lone rangers, when they have a problem, they only have my number to call. All the strings come back to me. Who else could they come back to? I'm the only one they know. It gets lonely when you are dealing constantly with the problems coming back to you, and dealing with them all alone. I was resentful for a awhile, and then I realized that people were just doing the best they could with the scenario I created for them.
I believe that people actually want to do ministry "with" you. In fact, there are not a lot of rewards for serving, but one of the biggest is community - of being part of something important with others. For the most part, I've had a team around me as I've ministered, and that has been very rewarding. I'm coming back to the importance of doing ministry out of community, with others. Our mission statement actually gets this sequence correct: "an authentic Christian community that effectively reaches out."
To get this order better established in my own life I am taking action. I've decided to reinstitute a weekly staff meeting. I understand that time is precious, but there are some things that we cannot not do. Being together is one of them. I am also going to institute a monthly Ministry Pow Wow for anyone in the Burlington Worship Center to come together and talk about leadership and ministry. This is going to be a time of challenge and training. I believe we can find great strength from each other...with each other. I also am going to be having lunch once a month with a group of colleagues, an iron sharpens iron time with fellow pastors. God has clearly surrounded me with brothers who can help to hold my arms up in the battle. The question comes back to whether I will let them do that for me.
Jesus asked us to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. It's not either/or, it's both/and. It is as we are loving ourselves that we are loving others. A friend in ministry recently asked me, "Why don't you feel the need to take care of yourself?" I think that's a good question. The answer is probably too complicated for me to figure out right now, so I'm just going to go back to caring for myself, like I should have been all along.
Many leaders feel alone. I have to admit, I had a serious bout with aloneness at the end of last year. For the most part, I have not dealt with aloneness in ministry, so I probably don't know how to deal with it very well. When it hit, it hit hard. As I have run to the Lord, I have received comfort, and I have also gained some insights:
1. If I choose to do ministry by myself, the Lord will let me. He, of course, promised to be with us to the end of the age. He knows better than we do that we cannot do ministry on our own. He said, "Apart from me you can do nothing." But on the other hand, God is a gentleman, and he does not go where he is not wanted or invited. So if you do not regularly invoke the Lord's presence in your life and take time to be with Him, He will leave you...alone.
There are some things I used to do to be with Him. I am coming back to these things. I used to take Monday's as a "personal work day." On that day I would not schedule meetings or try to "produce" stuff. I would simply take that day to do what I needed to do to be spiritually healthy. I would pray. I would meditate. I would read from the word. I would be "with" Him. During this past year I found it difficult to keep Mondays set aside for Him. This coming year I will find it difficult again, but this year I intend to overcome those difficulties. Being with Him is priority. I simply cannot do ministry without Him. In previous years I used to take one day a month as a day of prayer and fasting. I am going to do that again this year. I have already set aside the days in which I will get away from phones and email and be in solitude with God. I used to take some weekends off from teaching, not to teach somewhere else, but to not teach at all. Every quarter this year I'm going to do it again. Jesus modeled this behavior for us. As the crowds were coming, He was exiting stage left. He knew something that I've known before and am relearning all over again: It's pretty great when we are connected to the vine, and it's pretty lame when we're not.
2. If I choose to do ministry by myself, people will let me. I think I have done a great job of "releasing" people for ministry. But in an ironic twist, when I send them out as lone rangers, when they have a problem, they only have my number to call. All the strings come back to me. Who else could they come back to? I'm the only one they know. It gets lonely when you are dealing constantly with the problems coming back to you, and dealing with them all alone. I was resentful for a awhile, and then I realized that people were just doing the best they could with the scenario I created for them.
I believe that people actually want to do ministry "with" you. In fact, there are not a lot of rewards for serving, but one of the biggest is community - of being part of something important with others. For the most part, I've had a team around me as I've ministered, and that has been very rewarding. I'm coming back to the importance of doing ministry out of community, with others. Our mission statement actually gets this sequence correct: "an authentic Christian community that effectively reaches out."
To get this order better established in my own life I am taking action. I've decided to reinstitute a weekly staff meeting. I understand that time is precious, but there are some things that we cannot not do. Being together is one of them. I am also going to institute a monthly Ministry Pow Wow for anyone in the Burlington Worship Center to come together and talk about leadership and ministry. This is going to be a time of challenge and training. I believe we can find great strength from each other...with each other. I also am going to be having lunch once a month with a group of colleagues, an iron sharpens iron time with fellow pastors. God has clearly surrounded me with brothers who can help to hold my arms up in the battle. The question comes back to whether I will let them do that for me.
Jesus asked us to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. It's not either/or, it's both/and. It is as we are loving ourselves that we are loving others. A friend in ministry recently asked me, "Why don't you feel the need to take care of yourself?" I think that's a good question. The answer is probably too complicated for me to figure out right now, so I'm just going to go back to caring for myself, like I should have been all along.
Baby
Healthy spiritual leadership is akin to parenting. You could say that the ministry is your "baby." As your baby, you'll want to play close attention to its care and feeding.
An example of someone taking care of "their baby" is Howard Schultz of Starbucks Coffee. The founder, he has recently returned to run the company when it floundered. He found that there was no one who cared for the organization and the people in it like he did. You have a different level of passion and attention to detail when it's "your baby." No one cares for a kid like their parent. David Lubars says of Schultz, "He wants to be involved in how that child is being taken care of."
When it comes to caring, just as there are discernible differences among parents, there are also differences when it comes to pastors and Christian leaders. Jesus spoke of the difference between the shepherd/owner and the hireling. The hireling really doesn't care about the sheep, he just cares about his job.
I sometimes wonder how many people in ministry are hirelings. I think it's good for us to look at our own hearts in this regard. Are we marking time, or making a difference? Are we operating from a place of gifting and passion, or just going through the motions. If you are going through the motions, everything about your ministry will begin to sag: the prayers you pray, the teaching you give, the meetings you lead.
Of course, if you become parental in your ministry (read: emotionally involved) you also run the same risk as any parent, of getting hurt. Someone has said that "to be a mom is to forever wear your heart outside your body." Paul said some things that were very similar to that about his ministry. It's a great blessing and a great pain to be a parent. As a pastor you just have to multiply that by hundreds.
Along this line, read this excerpt from Captain Michael Abrashoff's book, It's Your Ship.
MY FIRST INKLING OF THE SIZE OF THE JOB CAME AT 1:21 in the afternoon of June 20, 1997, after I formally assumed command of USS Benfold.
When a Navy ship changes hands, all routine work stops two weeks prior to the event. The crew paints the ship from top to bottom, sets up a big tent on the flight deck, arranges chairs for dignitaries, and unrolls a red carpet for the obligatory admiral, who delivers a speech on the outstanding performance of the ship's departing skipper. A reception follows. Waves of good feeling saturate the event as the former commanding officer is piped ashore.
My predecessor was accompanied by his family as he left the ship. And when the public-address system announced his final departure, much of the crew was not disappointed to see him go. I can still feel my face flushing with embarrassment when I remember how some didn't give him a respectful send-off.
Truthfully, my first thought as I watched this spectacle was about myself. How could I ensure that my eventual departure wouldn't be met with relief when I left the ship in two years? I was taking over a very tough crew who didn't exactly adore their captain.
The crew would probably dislike me, I thought, if for no other reason than that I represented old-fashioned and perhaps obsolete authority. That was okay; being likable is not high among a ship captain's job requirements. What is essential is to be respected, trusted, and effective. Listening to those raucous jeers, I realized that I had a long way to go before I really took command ofBenfold.
I knew that I would have to come up with a new leadership model, geared to a new era. And this awkward reception underlined for me just how much the workplace had changed in military as well as in civilian life.
Never before had employees felt so free to tell their bosses what they thought of them. In the long economic boom, people were not afraid of losing their jobs. Other jobs awaited them; even modestly qualified people moved from one company to another in a quest for the perfect position they believed they richly deserved.
However the economy is doing, a challenge for leaders in the twenty-first century is attracting and retaining not just employees, but the best employees—and more important, how to motivate them so that they work with passion, energy, and enthusiasm. But very few people with brains, skills, and initiative appear. The timeless challenge in the real world is to help less-talented people transcend their limitations.
Pondering all this in the context of my post as the new captain ofBenfold, I read some exit surveys, interviews conducted by the military to find out why people are leaving. I assumed that low pay would be the first reason, but in fact it was fifth. The top reason was not being treated with respect or dignity; second was being prevented from making an impact on the organization; third, not being listened to; and fourth, not being rewarded with more responsibility. Talk about an eye-opener.
Further research disclosed an unexpected parallel with civilian life. According to a recent survey, low pay is also number five on the list of reasons why private employees jump from one company to another. And the top four reasons are virtually the same as in the military. The inescapable conclusion is that, as leaders, we are all doing the same wrong things.
Since a ship's captain can't hand out pay raises, much less stock options, I decided that during my two years commanding Benfold, I would concentrate on dealing with the unhappy sailors' top four gripes. My organizing principle was simple: The key to being a successful skipper is to see the ship through the eyes of the crew. Only then can you find out what's really wrong and, in so doing, help the sailors empower themselves to fix it.
An example of someone taking care of "their baby" is Howard Schultz of Starbucks Coffee. The founder, he has recently returned to run the company when it floundered. He found that there was no one who cared for the organization and the people in it like he did. You have a different level of passion and attention to detail when it's "your baby." No one cares for a kid like their parent. David Lubars says of Schultz, "He wants to be involved in how that child is being taken care of."
When it comes to caring, just as there are discernible differences among parents, there are also differences when it comes to pastors and Christian leaders. Jesus spoke of the difference between the shepherd/owner and the hireling. The hireling really doesn't care about the sheep, he just cares about his job.
I sometimes wonder how many people in ministry are hirelings. I think it's good for us to look at our own hearts in this regard. Are we marking time, or making a difference? Are we operating from a place of gifting and passion, or just going through the motions. If you are going through the motions, everything about your ministry will begin to sag: the prayers you pray, the teaching you give, the meetings you lead.
Of course, if you become parental in your ministry (read: emotionally involved) you also run the same risk as any parent, of getting hurt. Someone has said that "to be a mom is to forever wear your heart outside your body." Paul said some things that were very similar to that about his ministry. It's a great blessing and a great pain to be a parent. As a pastor you just have to multiply that by hundreds.
Along this line, read this excerpt from Captain Michael Abrashoff's book, It's Your Ship.
MY FIRST INKLING OF THE SIZE OF THE JOB CAME AT 1:21 in the afternoon of June 20, 1997, after I formally assumed command of USS Benfold.
When a Navy ship changes hands, all routine work stops two weeks prior to the event. The crew paints the ship from top to bottom, sets up a big tent on the flight deck, arranges chairs for dignitaries, and unrolls a red carpet for the obligatory admiral, who delivers a speech on the outstanding performance of the ship's departing skipper. A reception follows. Waves of good feeling saturate the event as the former commanding officer is piped ashore.
My predecessor was accompanied by his family as he left the ship. And when the public-address system announced his final departure, much of the crew was not disappointed to see him go. I can still feel my face flushing with embarrassment when I remember how some didn't give him a respectful send-off.
Truthfully, my first thought as I watched this spectacle was about myself. How could I ensure that my eventual departure wouldn't be met with relief when I left the ship in two years? I was taking over a very tough crew who didn't exactly adore their captain.
The crew would probably dislike me, I thought, if for no other reason than that I represented old-fashioned and perhaps obsolete authority. That was okay; being likable is not high among a ship captain's job requirements. What is essential is to be respected, trusted, and effective. Listening to those raucous jeers, I realized that I had a long way to go before I really took command ofBenfold.
I knew that I would have to come up with a new leadership model, geared to a new era. And this awkward reception underlined for me just how much the workplace had changed in military as well as in civilian life.
Never before had employees felt so free to tell their bosses what they thought of them. In the long economic boom, people were not afraid of losing their jobs. Other jobs awaited them; even modestly qualified people moved from one company to another in a quest for the perfect position they believed they richly deserved.
However the economy is doing, a challenge for leaders in the twenty-first century is attracting and retaining not just employees, but the best employees—and more important, how to motivate them so that they work with passion, energy, and enthusiasm. But very few people with brains, skills, and initiative appear. The timeless challenge in the real world is to help less-talented people transcend their limitations.
Pondering all this in the context of my post as the new captain ofBenfold, I read some exit surveys, interviews conducted by the military to find out why people are leaving. I assumed that low pay would be the first reason, but in fact it was fifth. The top reason was not being treated with respect or dignity; second was being prevented from making an impact on the organization; third, not being listened to; and fourth, not being rewarded with more responsibility. Talk about an eye-opener.
Further research disclosed an unexpected parallel with civilian life. According to a recent survey, low pay is also number five on the list of reasons why private employees jump from one company to another. And the top four reasons are virtually the same as in the military. The inescapable conclusion is that, as leaders, we are all doing the same wrong things.
Since a ship's captain can't hand out pay raises, much less stock options, I decided that during my two years commanding Benfold, I would concentrate on dealing with the unhappy sailors' top four gripes. My organizing principle was simple: The key to being a successful skipper is to see the ship through the eyes of the crew. Only then can you find out what's really wrong and, in so doing, help the sailors empower themselves to fix it.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Embody
CTK is a populist movement. The DNA is being carried by real people in real places. This is precisely what we want to see. We want EVERYBODY to embody the values that mean so much to us. But make no mistake. The values will not be carried by EVERYBODY unless SOMEBODY carries them first. If SOMEBODY doesn't embody the values, NOBODY will. Great ministries are always a team effort. But at the point of the spear is one person, the embodiment of what that ministry is about. For instance.
Focus on the Family...James Dobson, the founder, immediately comes to mind when you think of this ministry. But not just because he's the founder. You think of him because he personally represents conservative family values. He embodies what the ministry is about.
Campus Crusade...Well, you can't think about Crusade without thinking about Bill Bright. Bill was the outgoing personality who would go anywhere to anyone to share Christ. Guess what? Crusade is still doing that.
The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association...Ok. This one's too easy. But certainly, Billy Graham personally embodies evangelism.
If you show me a group with a strong culture of sacrifice and service, I'll show you someone - a leader - who represents those values, who embodies them, if you will. If you show me a team on a mission, I'll show you a captain or coach on a mission. He doesn't just talk about the mission, he exemplifies missional behavior in what he does, and who he is. We have to hemorrhage if we want our people to bleed.
In the CTK story, the pastor is charged with being the SOMEBODY who embodies the mission, so that EVERYBODY can. If he doesn't, don't expect the body to go beyond their leader. The pace of the leader is the pace of the team. Everything rises and falls with leadership.
As a leader in the CTK story, what should you embody?
1. A life of community. Small groups are the basic building block of our church. Everyone in leadership should be in one, not just so that they can say they are in one, but so that they can be fully immersed in community, just like everyone else. It does us no good to have a leader in our story talk about relationships, and then have none.
2. A life of devotion. We say that we want to have worship be our lifestyle. Are you the person who regularly calls the group to prayer, or redirects folks back to the word? Do you spend time in solitude with Jesus? If you behave like Martha, you won't inspire very many Marys, no matter how hard you preach.
3. A life of mission. Do lost people matter to you? Deeply? People can tell if you are content with "us four, no more." When was the last time you reached out personally to someone who needed Jesus? You can't spend all your time with Christians and have people believe that you are all about lost people. It just won't work.
Vision leaks. The second law of thermodynamics states that things tend to go from order to disorder. This is a tendency that can be bucked, however. It doesn't have to go this way. It just usually does. And it definitely does without the intervention of a leader who says, "No, we're not going there....we're going here." And then (and this is critical) he himself takes off in the stated direction, looks over his shoulder and says, "You guys are coming, right?"
Focus on the Family...James Dobson, the founder, immediately comes to mind when you think of this ministry. But not just because he's the founder. You think of him because he personally represents conservative family values. He embodies what the ministry is about.
Campus Crusade...Well, you can't think about Crusade without thinking about Bill Bright. Bill was the outgoing personality who would go anywhere to anyone to share Christ. Guess what? Crusade is still doing that.
The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association...Ok. This one's too easy. But certainly, Billy Graham personally embodies evangelism.
If you show me a group with a strong culture of sacrifice and service, I'll show you someone - a leader - who represents those values, who embodies them, if you will. If you show me a team on a mission, I'll show you a captain or coach on a mission. He doesn't just talk about the mission, he exemplifies missional behavior in what he does, and who he is. We have to hemorrhage if we want our people to bleed.
In the CTK story, the pastor is charged with being the SOMEBODY who embodies the mission, so that EVERYBODY can. If he doesn't, don't expect the body to go beyond their leader. The pace of the leader is the pace of the team. Everything rises and falls with leadership.
As a leader in the CTK story, what should you embody?
1. A life of community. Small groups are the basic building block of our church. Everyone in leadership should be in one, not just so that they can say they are in one, but so that they can be fully immersed in community, just like everyone else. It does us no good to have a leader in our story talk about relationships, and then have none.
2. A life of devotion. We say that we want to have worship be our lifestyle. Are you the person who regularly calls the group to prayer, or redirects folks back to the word? Do you spend time in solitude with Jesus? If you behave like Martha, you won't inspire very many Marys, no matter how hard you preach.
3. A life of mission. Do lost people matter to you? Deeply? People can tell if you are content with "us four, no more." When was the last time you reached out personally to someone who needed Jesus? You can't spend all your time with Christians and have people believe that you are all about lost people. It just won't work.
Vision leaks. The second law of thermodynamics states that things tend to go from order to disorder. This is a tendency that can be bucked, however. It doesn't have to go this way. It just usually does. And it definitely does without the intervention of a leader who says, "No, we're not going there....we're going here." And then (and this is critical) he himself takes off in the stated direction, looks over his shoulder and says, "You guys are coming, right?"
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Ways
How does the kingdom expand? How does a church grow? How do you conduct a staff meeting? How do you share your faith? How do you do youth ministry? The questions are straightforward. The answers not so much. As near as I can tell, the answer is: "It depends."
I was recently at a conference where I and two other pastors of "multi-site" churches told our stories. We were each chosen because we represented slightly different approaches to being one church in many locations. Backstage, prior to one of the sessions, someone commented on how cool it was that three different churches, with three different styles, could come together in one conference. I jokingly quipped, "But aren't we really here to find out which approach is right?" There was nervous laughter because we all knew that much of sordid church history has been in the quest "to find the one right way."
It's about time we realize that there is not "a right way," there are just "right ways." In order to reach people that no one is reaching you may have to do things that no one is doing. In order to do things that no one else is doing, you can’t do what everyone else is doing. God is not formulaic in his approach. One of the reasons we have so many differences in the body of Christ is that God's ways (plural, remember?) are personal and profound, mysterious and multi-faceted. Just when we think we have Him figured out, the pillar of fire and cloud moves. The sooner we get our heads around ways instead of way, the more enjoyment we will find in the way that God is at work in our ministry, and others'.
Just because God is at work in a certain way in someone's story doesn't mean He wants to work that way in yours. Both Joseph and Moses had very similar experiences, with very different conclusions. They both were raised in Egyptian royal households. Both rose to positions of prominence, and had potential for significant power. In Joseph's case, the power was part of the plan that God had for him. In Moses' case, he needed to shun that power to follow God's script. It's a good thing they followed what God had in mind for them, and didn't copy what they had read in a Christian magazine.
I was recently at a conference where I and two other pastors of "multi-site" churches told our stories. We were each chosen because we represented slightly different approaches to being one church in many locations. Backstage, prior to one of the sessions, someone commented on how cool it was that three different churches, with three different styles, could come together in one conference. I jokingly quipped, "But aren't we really here to find out which approach is right?" There was nervous laughter because we all knew that much of sordid church history has been in the quest "to find the one right way."
It's about time we realize that there is not "a right way," there are just "right ways." In order to reach people that no one is reaching you may have to do things that no one is doing. In order to do things that no one else is doing, you can’t do what everyone else is doing. God is not formulaic in his approach. One of the reasons we have so many differences in the body of Christ is that God's ways (plural, remember?) are personal and profound, mysterious and multi-faceted. Just when we think we have Him figured out, the pillar of fire and cloud moves. The sooner we get our heads around ways instead of way, the more enjoyment we will find in the way that God is at work in our ministry, and others'.
Just because God is at work in a certain way in someone's story doesn't mean He wants to work that way in yours. Both Joseph and Moses had very similar experiences, with very different conclusions. They both were raised in Egyptian royal households. Both rose to positions of prominence, and had potential for significant power. In Joseph's case, the power was part of the plan that God had for him. In Moses' case, he needed to shun that power to follow God's script. It's a good thing they followed what God had in mind for them, and didn't copy what they had read in a Christian magazine.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Other
A lot of lines are being blurred in our culture today. During the last election cycle in the USA we saw that people were a lot less interested in voting along party lines, for instance. Convenient categories like "Democrat" and "Republican" are giving way to "Independent." When people are asked their ethnicity(Caucasian, Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc.), over 30% now check "other." Even our president is not so easily defined. This has implications for ministry.
1. Scrub your stereotypes. Depending on your upbringing, you may be bringing slight to extreme stereotypes with you into ministry. Check them at the door. If you feel that certain people groups are a certain way, you need to realize the magnificent spectrum that is presented to us in the real world. You cannot tell a book by its cover. Get to know people and their unique stories. Jesus showed us how with the Samaritan woman.
2. Make it personal. It used to be that a pastor spoke primarily to families, and then secondarily to single people. Today, relationships are much more complicated. People have blended families, multiple families, broken families, no family. And single may mean "divorced," or "cohabitating" or "gay." Consequently, effective communicators do not assume that they are talking to Ward, June and Beaver Cleaver. Narrow your focus to the individual.
3. Expand your categories. When we are speaking you need to present a broader and more inclusive list of categories. For instance, you are probably talking in front of people who are suicidal, trapped in drug abuse, white collar criminals, etc. So if you say, "You might be here and be discouraged" you lose credibility, because people are thinking "That's the least of it!" If you don't get a broader list of categories, folks will put you in one: "Out of touch with reality."
4. Diversify your team. Do you have minorities on your leadership team? On your worship team? In your ministry? If not, you won't look very inclusive, even if you are. Do your best to think outside the box, particularly if the box is "people who are a lot like me."
5. Target new audiences. Are you reaching out to the people in your community, or just one variety of people in your community? Strategize about reaching other people groups. As a result of prayer God may place a burden on your heart for people of differing geography, ethnicity or socio-economic status. If you don't know how to reach them, maybe invite them for dinner and go from there.
With spiritual eyes we see that there are not classes of people, there are only people, like you and like me. People who are in need of a savior.
1. Scrub your stereotypes. Depending on your upbringing, you may be bringing slight to extreme stereotypes with you into ministry. Check them at the door. If you feel that certain people groups are a certain way, you need to realize the magnificent spectrum that is presented to us in the real world. You cannot tell a book by its cover. Get to know people and their unique stories. Jesus showed us how with the Samaritan woman.
2. Make it personal. It used to be that a pastor spoke primarily to families, and then secondarily to single people. Today, relationships are much more complicated. People have blended families, multiple families, broken families, no family. And single may mean "divorced," or "cohabitating" or "gay." Consequently, effective communicators do not assume that they are talking to Ward, June and Beaver Cleaver. Narrow your focus to the individual.
3. Expand your categories. When we are speaking you need to present a broader and more inclusive list of categories. For instance, you are probably talking in front of people who are suicidal, trapped in drug abuse, white collar criminals, etc. So if you say, "You might be here and be discouraged" you lose credibility, because people are thinking "That's the least of it!" If you don't get a broader list of categories, folks will put you in one: "Out of touch with reality."
4. Diversify your team. Do you have minorities on your leadership team? On your worship team? In your ministry? If not, you won't look very inclusive, even if you are. Do your best to think outside the box, particularly if the box is "people who are a lot like me."
5. Target new audiences. Are you reaching out to the people in your community, or just one variety of people in your community? Strategize about reaching other people groups. As a result of prayer God may place a burden on your heart for people of differing geography, ethnicity or socio-economic status. If you don't know how to reach them, maybe invite them for dinner and go from there.
With spiritual eyes we see that there are not classes of people, there are only people, like you and like me. People who are in need of a savior.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Infiltrate
We have a choice. We can either dominate the culture or infiltrate the culture. Over the centuries the church has tried both approaches, with very different results.
After periods in which the church has tried to dominate the culture, the world has experienced dark ages. After periods in which the church has tried to infiltrate the culture, the world has experienced great awakenings.
One of the reasons the church in America has struggled spiritually in the past generation is that we have been the home team, dominating the culture. We haven't transformed the spiritual landscape, we've just gotten our way. We have depended on the government to protect our ability to exist. We may have passed the legislation, or gotten the courts to rule on "our side," but we haven't changed people's hearts on the matter. We have used power to control the culture, instead of influence to create a culture. Meanwhile evil has been seething underneath the surface, and as the old saying goes, "Payback is a bummer."
In all likelihood, American culture is about to get outright hostile toward matters of faith and Christianity. This is only a problem to us if we are trying to maintain our power position. This is only disconcerting if we perceive this to be a game with a winner and a loser. If, on the other hand, our goal is to infiltrate it won't be bad for us to be "underground." Not bad at all.
In the darkest of night even the smallest of lights shines bright. Many modern-day movements of God are taking place in hostile environments. The church in China, for instance, now numbers hundreds of millions. Could it be that the church thrives under persecution precisely because the hostility makes only infiltration possible?
So....we can dominate or infiltrate. I wonder which Jesus wants us to do?
After periods in which the church has tried to dominate the culture, the world has experienced dark ages. After periods in which the church has tried to infiltrate the culture, the world has experienced great awakenings.
One of the reasons the church in America has struggled spiritually in the past generation is that we have been the home team, dominating the culture. We haven't transformed the spiritual landscape, we've just gotten our way. We have depended on the government to protect our ability to exist. We may have passed the legislation, or gotten the courts to rule on "our side," but we haven't changed people's hearts on the matter. We have used power to control the culture, instead of influence to create a culture. Meanwhile evil has been seething underneath the surface, and as the old saying goes, "Payback is a bummer."
In all likelihood, American culture is about to get outright hostile toward matters of faith and Christianity. This is only a problem to us if we are trying to maintain our power position. This is only disconcerting if we perceive this to be a game with a winner and a loser. If, on the other hand, our goal is to infiltrate it won't be bad for us to be "underground." Not bad at all.
In the darkest of night even the smallest of lights shines bright. Many modern-day movements of God are taking place in hostile environments. The church in China, for instance, now numbers hundreds of millions. Could it be that the church thrives under persecution precisely because the hostility makes only infiltration possible?
So....we can dominate or infiltrate. I wonder which Jesus wants us to do?
Thursday, November 06, 2008
Thinking
A friend of mine asked me if I had noticed the difference between the television ads for Macintosh and Microsoft. I told him I hadn't really paid attention, except that I'm a Mac fan and have found their "I'm a Mac....I'm a PC" ads pretty clever. He agreed with me that the Mac ads are killing the PC ads in popularity, and then he asked me a pretty good question. "Which ad is substance, and which ad is style?" I had to admit that the Mac ad is really all about style. A cool looking and acting actor (Mac guy) is pitted against a backward looking and acting actor (PC guy). The Mac guy seems totally relaxed and helpful. The PC guy is never quite at ease, seems scattered, self-absorbed and stupid. But there really isn't much in these ads about the actual difference between using a Macintosh computer or a PC. From watching these Mac ads you just come away with a feeling (not really much in the way of facts) that points you to the Mac as the "better" choice. What does this say about the culture we're in?
Prior to the presidential election a high school teacher I know gave his class a paper with the political positions of the two candidates presented side by side. At the top of the page was simply "Candidate A" and "Candidate B." Based on the positions the men took, the class favored Candidate A. The teacher then asked whether the class was voting for Senator Obama or McCain. This particular group of High Schoolers was overwhelmingly for Obama. Why? They said he was "young" and "has fresh ideas" and they "liked him better." They were shocked to find out that he was Candidate B. They were "for" him, not based on substance, but style.
Also, be aware that if you present a substantive idea, and expect people to get it "based on the merits," you'll be seriously disappointed. As a Christian leader, don't assume the people you're leading are thinking deeply about what really matters. They probably aren't. So for the time being, unless you are politically savvy enough to run a good campaign, you can expect defeat. Most pastors I know have ideas that are good to great. Many times those great ideas are dead on arrival because the pastor has assumed that people will think as deeply about the issue as s/he has, and they have not learned the importance of building a coalition, selling the sizzle, and answering the question that people keep asking (even if we wish they weren't): "What's in it for me?" This is not a Jesus question, of course, and never will be. But who's job is it to get people asking better, more noble, questions? Yup.
There is no question that people today lack critical thinking skills. This can either be extremely discouraging to you (it often is for me), or it can challenge you "get after it" and to teach people to think. Not what to think. How to think.
Prior to the presidential election a high school teacher I know gave his class a paper with the political positions of the two candidates presented side by side. At the top of the page was simply "Candidate A" and "Candidate B." Based on the positions the men took, the class favored Candidate A. The teacher then asked whether the class was voting for Senator Obama or McCain. This particular group of High Schoolers was overwhelmingly for Obama. Why? They said he was "young" and "has fresh ideas" and they "liked him better." They were shocked to find out that he was Candidate B. They were "for" him, not based on substance, but style.
Also, be aware that if you present a substantive idea, and expect people to get it "based on the merits," you'll be seriously disappointed. As a Christian leader, don't assume the people you're leading are thinking deeply about what really matters. They probably aren't. So for the time being, unless you are politically savvy enough to run a good campaign, you can expect defeat. Most pastors I know have ideas that are good to great. Many times those great ideas are dead on arrival because the pastor has assumed that people will think as deeply about the issue as s/he has, and they have not learned the importance of building a coalition, selling the sizzle, and answering the question that people keep asking (even if we wish they weren't): "What's in it for me?" This is not a Jesus question, of course, and never will be. But who's job is it to get people asking better, more noble, questions? Yup.
There is no question that people today lack critical thinking skills. This can either be extremely discouraging to you (it often is for me), or it can challenge you "get after it" and to teach people to think. Not what to think. How to think.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Big
I'm not sure that bigger is better. But I'm not convinced it's all bad, either. As I've thought about size, particularly the size of congregations, my thoughts have evolved in the following progression.
1. Big is wrong. This was what I thought when I was a kid growing up in a (small) fundamentalist church. I was pretty certain that if it was big it must not be gospel-preaching. They must be watering it down. Because if they were preaching the fire and brimstone we were they would be small like us.
2. Big is amazing. This was what I though as a teenager when I encountered the Anchorage Baptist Temple. My first exposure to the mega church left me with my jaw dropped. This was a church that didn't have hundreds of people attending each week, but thousands. They had the biggest choir I had ever seen. They brought people in on buses from around the city. Something seemed wrong about it, but I couldn't figure out what it was. They were preaching the gospel, even throwing in some occasional fire and brimstone, but they were drawing a crowd.
3. Big is the goal. As I made my way through seminary I decided that there was really no point in pastoring unless I was going to do it in a big way, with a big church. As a youth pastor in a dying denominational church, I chafed under the short-sitedness of the leadership. As a young (too young really) senior pastor I got my hands on every book I could find about church growth. I attended every seminar I could find. I made my pilgrimage to Willow Creek. I enrolled in a Doctoral Program at Overlake Christian Church, the largest church in the Northwest at the time. I started to work the angles to "grow my church." My church did indeed grew, but I didn't, and I left that church, and the ministry for that matter, fairly disillusioned. The church had never been bigger. I had never been smaller. My pursuit of big was about me, not Him.
4. Big is easier. When I returned to church (as a wounded soul on the back row of Christ the King Church in Laurel, Washington), CTK was clustering in two campuses and five services. The vibe was cool and chaotic, but meeting in two different places was obviously hard on the staff. Shortly after I joined the staff we consolidated everything and everybody into a larger building. This wasn't my idea necessarily, but I was a team player. The consolidation made things easier, but not necessarily better. We lost something in the transition that we could never get back. Our sense of community and widespread personal involvement gave way to professionalism and crowd management. This seemed like a bad trade to me.
5. Big is bad. When I launched out on my own, and started CTK in Mount Vernon, I spoke highly of meeting in smaller congregations. I told the story of CTK meeting in multiple locations and services. I said, "We're not going to ask everyone to come to us, we are going to ask us to go to them." I had come to the conclusion that more was better than bigger. In an effort to make my case, I probably overstated the badness of bigness, probably because I was questioning bigness as the accepted measure of success. I started asking questions like "Isn't the goal to reach a community, instead of build a church? At times when it seemed like no one was listening, I turned up the volume, and then backed that up with some action. As CTK in Mount Vernon grew we "spun off" groups of people in six neighboring towns. But at the same time, Mount Vernon continued to grow bigger as well, and to this day is our biggest Worship Center.
6. Big is big...and that can be both good and bad. Lately, I've come to a more tempered view of bigness. I don't think bigness is as great as people have made it out to be, but I think there are worse things happening in the world, as well. I've been thinking that the relative merits of bigness depend on the answer to some questions:
Are people being treated personally, or like cattle? Call me old-fashioned, but is it possible for a person to actually meet the pastor? I've encountered staff members of large churches who have never met the pastor there. Modernity has given us these constructs and called it good. It seems to me that the church of Jesus Christ should be a little more personal than that.
Are people becoming passive? Crowds tend toward people sitting around, listening, taking notes and going home. We don't want this, and we don't get as much of it in smaller congregations. But it is possible for a larger congregation to have high participation in small groups and mitigate this tendency. The key word is "possible" since most mega churches don't quite get there - it's just too hard to get people from sitting on their hands.
Are we staying or going? Are the arrows pointing in or out? Jesus' instructions were clear: Go. There is a tendency, as groups become more established, to just start another staff-driven program and try to get more people to come to us. This is not a good development, for the community or us. Bigness tends to squash or slow the entrepreneurial spirit. Smallness keeps you nimble. On the other hand, the resources that you need to launch often come out of bigness. Maybe there's a sweet spot here, where we can be big enough to spawn, but small enough to do it quickly.
How do small and big relate to each other? Is small in service to the big, or is big in service to the small? This may end up being the most fundamental philosophical question to discern whether bigness is virtuous or not. What we have tended to see in evangelicalism is the small in service to the big. What is more virtuous is for the big to be in service to the small. In an organic system you will see bigness. For instance, in a forest you might find some extremely large trees. And there are some smaller flora and fauna that can only survive in the shade of that tree. So maybe its not whether it's big or small, but what is ultimately valued and protected.
God bless you,
1. Big is wrong. This was what I thought when I was a kid growing up in a (small) fundamentalist church. I was pretty certain that if it was big it must not be gospel-preaching. They must be watering it down. Because if they were preaching the fire and brimstone we were they would be small like us.
2. Big is amazing. This was what I though as a teenager when I encountered the Anchorage Baptist Temple. My first exposure to the mega church left me with my jaw dropped. This was a church that didn't have hundreds of people attending each week, but thousands. They had the biggest choir I had ever seen. They brought people in on buses from around the city. Something seemed wrong about it, but I couldn't figure out what it was. They were preaching the gospel, even throwing in some occasional fire and brimstone, but they were drawing a crowd.
3. Big is the goal. As I made my way through seminary I decided that there was really no point in pastoring unless I was going to do it in a big way, with a big church. As a youth pastor in a dying denominational church, I chafed under the short-sitedness of the leadership. As a young (too young really) senior pastor I got my hands on every book I could find about church growth. I attended every seminar I could find. I made my pilgrimage to Willow Creek. I enrolled in a Doctoral Program at Overlake Christian Church, the largest church in the Northwest at the time. I started to work the angles to "grow my church." My church did indeed grew, but I didn't, and I left that church, and the ministry for that matter, fairly disillusioned. The church had never been bigger. I had never been smaller. My pursuit of big was about me, not Him.
4. Big is easier. When I returned to church (as a wounded soul on the back row of Christ the King Church in Laurel, Washington), CTK was clustering in two campuses and five services. The vibe was cool and chaotic, but meeting in two different places was obviously hard on the staff. Shortly after I joined the staff we consolidated everything and everybody into a larger building. This wasn't my idea necessarily, but I was a team player. The consolidation made things easier, but not necessarily better. We lost something in the transition that we could never get back. Our sense of community and widespread personal involvement gave way to professionalism and crowd management. This seemed like a bad trade to me.
5. Big is bad. When I launched out on my own, and started CTK in Mount Vernon, I spoke highly of meeting in smaller congregations. I told the story of CTK meeting in multiple locations and services. I said, "We're not going to ask everyone to come to us, we are going to ask us to go to them." I had come to the conclusion that more was better than bigger. In an effort to make my case, I probably overstated the badness of bigness, probably because I was questioning bigness as the accepted measure of success. I started asking questions like "Isn't the goal to reach a community, instead of build a church? At times when it seemed like no one was listening, I turned up the volume, and then backed that up with some action. As CTK in Mount Vernon grew we "spun off" groups of people in six neighboring towns. But at the same time, Mount Vernon continued to grow bigger as well, and to this day is our biggest Worship Center.
6. Big is big...and that can be both good and bad. Lately, I've come to a more tempered view of bigness. I don't think bigness is as great as people have made it out to be, but I think there are worse things happening in the world, as well. I've been thinking that the relative merits of bigness depend on the answer to some questions:
Are people being treated personally, or like cattle? Call me old-fashioned, but is it possible for a person to actually meet the pastor? I've encountered staff members of large churches who have never met the pastor there. Modernity has given us these constructs and called it good. It seems to me that the church of Jesus Christ should be a little more personal than that.
Are people becoming passive? Crowds tend toward people sitting around, listening, taking notes and going home. We don't want this, and we don't get as much of it in smaller congregations. But it is possible for a larger congregation to have high participation in small groups and mitigate this tendency. The key word is "possible" since most mega churches don't quite get there - it's just too hard to get people from sitting on their hands.
Are we staying or going? Are the arrows pointing in or out? Jesus' instructions were clear: Go. There is a tendency, as groups become more established, to just start another staff-driven program and try to get more people to come to us. This is not a good development, for the community or us. Bigness tends to squash or slow the entrepreneurial spirit. Smallness keeps you nimble. On the other hand, the resources that you need to launch often come out of bigness. Maybe there's a sweet spot here, where we can be big enough to spawn, but small enough to do it quickly.
How do small and big relate to each other? Is small in service to the big, or is big in service to the small? This may end up being the most fundamental philosophical question to discern whether bigness is virtuous or not. What we have tended to see in evangelicalism is the small in service to the big. What is more virtuous is for the big to be in service to the small. In an organic system you will see bigness. For instance, in a forest you might find some extremely large trees. And there are some smaller flora and fauna that can only survive in the shade of that tree. So maybe its not whether it's big or small, but what is ultimately valued and protected.
God bless you,
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Startup
You can do a lot worse than follow Jesus. This applies not just to our beliefs but our practices. Like, how do you startup a new ministry? How about the answer, "Like Jesus told us to!" Here's Mark 6:7-10: Calling the Twelve to him, he sent them out two by two and gave them authority over evil spirits. These were his instructions: "Take nothing for the journey except a staff-no bread, no bag, no money in your belts. Wear sandals but not an extra tunic. Whenever you enter a house, stay there until you leave that town. And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them." Embedded in His instructions are some key ideas about starting a new ministry: 1. Build a Team. Notice that Jesus never asked anyone to "go it alone." If He had, there could have been 12 ministries, instead of 6. But Jesus knew that it would be better to have 6 strong and steady ministries, than 12 anemic discouraged ones. 2. Go with Empty Hands. While Jesus encouraged us to take people with us, he discouraged (demanded, really) that we not take stuff, not even essentials like food or a change of clothes. Why? He wants us to be in a position of vulnerability with people, not strength, where we need them as much or more than they need us. This is contrary to many church planters who want to be "fully prepared" before deploying. 3. Establish a Base of Operations. Jesus said, once you find a place of operational support, stop there, and instead of you continuing on, let that be a place from which the mission can be propagated. 4. Move out from there. How long do you stay at the base? Jesus said, "Until you leave that town." It's not if you'll leave, but when. The commission is not to stay, but to go. Jesus made the sequence clear: Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, the ends of the earth. Going means leaving behind a place of comfort for a place of challenge. But leaving behind a legacy as well - the presence of Christ, and fewer evil spirits.
Happy
Happy is found somewhere between not enough and too much. There's a sweet spot in life - a place where you find flow in your life and ministry. It's not a place of extreme. It's a place of balance. It's a place of health and proportion. It's "the comfort zone" between too cold and too hot.
This principle might apply to:
Your communication. The ideal message has enough content to satisfy, but not so much as to leave the listener feeling stuffed. Are your memos too long? Are your messages portion-controlled? Less is sometimes more when it comes to getting a message across, but you need enough illustration to make the message clear.
Your creativity. Are you feeling harried? Are you on the go constantly? You can only borrow from tomorrow's energy for awhile before you have to pay it back. The sabbath rhythm of six parts work, one part rest should be followed religiously. There's a balance there. Too little time away can leave you feeling worn out, negatively impacting creativity. Too much time away can leave you feeling lethargic instead of relaxed, negatively impacting creativity. What is the balance that leaves you happy?
Your work. Are your colleagues getting enough time with you? Too much? There's a balance here. Too many meetings and the work suffers from a lack of time to do it. Too few meetings and the work suffers from a lack of answers to the questions that predictably arise. Groups that are happy have the right balance between time together and time apart.
One way to find out whether you are in a "happy place" is to ask. People around you (like your spouse) will probably be able to see your lack of balance before you do.
This principle might apply to:
Your communication. The ideal message has enough content to satisfy, but not so much as to leave the listener feeling stuffed. Are your memos too long? Are your messages portion-controlled? Less is sometimes more when it comes to getting a message across, but you need enough illustration to make the message clear.
Your creativity. Are you feeling harried? Are you on the go constantly? You can only borrow from tomorrow's energy for awhile before you have to pay it back. The sabbath rhythm of six parts work, one part rest should be followed religiously. There's a balance there. Too little time away can leave you feeling worn out, negatively impacting creativity. Too much time away can leave you feeling lethargic instead of relaxed, negatively impacting creativity. What is the balance that leaves you happy?
Your work. Are your colleagues getting enough time with you? Too much? There's a balance here. Too many meetings and the work suffers from a lack of time to do it. Too few meetings and the work suffers from a lack of answers to the questions that predictably arise. Groups that are happy have the right balance between time together and time apart.
One way to find out whether you are in a "happy place" is to ask. People around you (like your spouse) will probably be able to see your lack of balance before you do.
Goals
Goals are a tricky thing. It is easy to succumb to extremes, and in either direction. You can become goal-driven, or goal- deprived. Neither is ideal or healthy.
I spent the first third of my life being goal-driven. This was reinforced for me in a private school system where every day I began by filling out my "goal chart." A goal chart is not a bad thing, in and of itself. But the way my brokenness "used" the chart (I know this is the language of addiction) was I became very driven to achieve and accomplish. Indeed, by setting and reaching goals I graduated from high school a year early, and from college at the top of my class. The driveness didn't cease until the wheels fell off my life in my early 30s. My excessive goal orientation was an accomplice in my demise.
On the other extreme, the extreme lack of goals is not particularly virtuous either. God has created us with capacity to look into the future, set goals for ourselves, and organize our lives in such a way to achieve them. The Apostle Paul was "pressing toward the mark." To never put this capacity in motion is just as problematic as the overuse of this capacity.
Goals are necessary, but should be balanced with a clear reliance upon God. Jesus prayed, "Not my will, but yours be done." Solomon wrote, "In his heart a man plans his course, but the Lord determines his steps." There is a balance here. We plan, but we also submit. We plan, but we also bend the knee.
How can you make goals a healthy part of your life? First, I would say, "Have some." If you don't have any goals for yourself, or your ministry, I would take out a piece of paper and write "Goals for myself and my ministry." Then I would get away with God and ask him to help you write some goals.
Second, I would take the list and put it in a place where you'll see it. Maybe place the list on your computer desktop, or on the wall near your desk.
Third, I would break your goals down into actionable steps, and put the steps on your to-do list. How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. Even a very large goal can be accomplished if you break it down sufficiently.
Fourth, I would transfer the steps from your to-do list to your calendar. Start putting actionable items in your schedule that get you taking steps your toward your goals.
Fifth, review your progress regularly. Put on your calendar times of self-review, where you can take readings on where you are at, and where you need to go.
I spent the first third of my life being goal-driven. This was reinforced for me in a private school system where every day I began by filling out my "goal chart." A goal chart is not a bad thing, in and of itself. But the way my brokenness "used" the chart (I know this is the language of addiction) was I became very driven to achieve and accomplish. Indeed, by setting and reaching goals I graduated from high school a year early, and from college at the top of my class. The driveness didn't cease until the wheels fell off my life in my early 30s. My excessive goal orientation was an accomplice in my demise.
On the other extreme, the extreme lack of goals is not particularly virtuous either. God has created us with capacity to look into the future, set goals for ourselves, and organize our lives in such a way to achieve them. The Apostle Paul was "pressing toward the mark." To never put this capacity in motion is just as problematic as the overuse of this capacity.
Goals are necessary, but should be balanced with a clear reliance upon God. Jesus prayed, "Not my will, but yours be done." Solomon wrote, "In his heart a man plans his course, but the Lord determines his steps." There is a balance here. We plan, but we also submit. We plan, but we also bend the knee.
How can you make goals a healthy part of your life? First, I would say, "Have some." If you don't have any goals for yourself, or your ministry, I would take out a piece of paper and write "Goals for myself and my ministry." Then I would get away with God and ask him to help you write some goals.
Second, I would take the list and put it in a place where you'll see it. Maybe place the list on your computer desktop, or on the wall near your desk.
Third, I would break your goals down into actionable steps, and put the steps on your to-do list. How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. Even a very large goal can be accomplished if you break it down sufficiently.
Fourth, I would transfer the steps from your to-do list to your calendar. Start putting actionable items in your schedule that get you taking steps your toward your goals.
Fifth, review your progress regularly. Put on your calendar times of self-review, where you can take readings on where you are at, and where you need to go.
Behave
How is the church supposed to behave? Different people may answer that in different ways, but I like to take my cues from what I read about the church in Acts 2....
Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.
While this passage is more descriptive than proscriptive, there are nevertheless some takeaways for us. Looking back to the first century, you see how the early church behaved:
1. Daily. The early church was a not a weekend or Sunday event, but an every day adventure. The gatherings were "every day" and the outreach was "daily."
2. Relationally. The church was growing rapidly and people were getting their needs met. How? Was the church developing a program or a department to meet the needs? No, believers simply noticed that their brother had a need and responded to it. Organically. Relationally.
3. Informally. The church did not meet in church buildings or auditoriums, but in living rooms, dining rooms and outdoor public spaces. One of the key things you see them doing is eating together. Meals are a great vehicle for fellowship and community.
4. Cellularly. The first century church met in different places, at different times. There is actually not a clear indication that everyone ever gathered in the same place at the same time. In all likelihood, the Jerusalem church grew to over 10,000 people in the first week, and we know that the temple courts could not accommodate that big of a crowd. So the early church was one church meeting in multiple locations, with multiple teachers (apostles, plural).
5. Joyfully. The first church was a happy experience. Words like glad, sincere, praying, enjoying speak to the fact that they were a happy group.
So, just to review. How does the church behave? Daily, Relationally, Informally, Cellularly, Joyfully. Who doesn't want to be a part of something like that?
Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.
While this passage is more descriptive than proscriptive, there are nevertheless some takeaways for us. Looking back to the first century, you see how the early church behaved:
1. Daily. The early church was a not a weekend or Sunday event, but an every day adventure. The gatherings were "every day" and the outreach was "daily."
2. Relationally. The church was growing rapidly and people were getting their needs met. How? Was the church developing a program or a department to meet the needs? No, believers simply noticed that their brother had a need and responded to it. Organically. Relationally.
3. Informally. The church did not meet in church buildings or auditoriums, but in living rooms, dining rooms and outdoor public spaces. One of the key things you see them doing is eating together. Meals are a great vehicle for fellowship and community.
4. Cellularly. The first century church met in different places, at different times. There is actually not a clear indication that everyone ever gathered in the same place at the same time. In all likelihood, the Jerusalem church grew to over 10,000 people in the first week, and we know that the temple courts could not accommodate that big of a crowd. So the early church was one church meeting in multiple locations, with multiple teachers (apostles, plural).
5. Joyfully. The first church was a happy experience. Words like glad, sincere, praying, enjoying speak to the fact that they were a happy group.
So, just to review. How does the church behave? Daily, Relationally, Informally, Cellularly, Joyfully. Who doesn't want to be a part of something like that?
Badly
If a thing is worth doing, it is worth doing badly.
Have you seen some things being done badly in your ministry lately? If so, it might be a good sign! Not everyone would agree with me, of course. And that's not something you hear in seminary every day, for sure! But listen to G.K. Chesterton's explanation: "It is a good sign in a nation when things are done badly. It shows that all the people are doing them. And it is bad sign in a nation when such things are done very well, for it shows that only a few experts and eccentrics are doing them, and that the nation is merely looking on." Now read that quote again and substitute the word "church" for "nation":
"It is a good sign in a church when things are done badly. It shows that all the people are doing them. And it is a bad sign in a church when such things are done very well, for it shows that only a few experts and eccentrics are doing them, and that the church is merely looking on."
In most growing and going churches things are not done badly, that's for sure. The emphasis of the attractional church model has been on professional excellence. There is a hired staff doing the ministry, ensuring that it is done right (by "experts and eccentrics"). Professionalism has left the church "merely looking on," instead of as engaged participants. The church growth maxim that quality is the means to quality has ruled out the contributions of millions of believers (that is, except their contribution of money to support the professionals).
I believe that the church is on the front edge of a second reformation. The first reformation placed the word of God into the hands of the people; the second reformation is placing the ministry into the hands of the people. This shift parallels shifts in the culture, where quality is being exchanged for broader participation and diversity.
A good example of this is YouTube. YouTube is not professionally produced television. It is of the people, by the people, for the people. There are hundreds of thousands of contributions coming from average people. Is the quality at the level of Steven Spielberg? Not exactly. YouTube videos are in "the steep part of the curve" in terms of cost and time. But don't underestimate how revolutionary this shift to the amateur is. Ten years ago only professionals could produce a video that could distributed worldwide. Now anyone can do it. Because anyone can do it, anyone does, which leads to exponential growth. When you think about it, everything in our world that is growing exponentially (YouTube, Facebook, Google, etc.) is based on the architecture of participation, not professionalism.
There's a new day coming, where things worth doing are going to be done badly. The first reformation followed the invention of the printing press. The second reformation will follow the invention of the internet.
Have you seen some things being done badly in your ministry lately? If so, it might be a good sign! Not everyone would agree with me, of course. And that's not something you hear in seminary every day, for sure! But listen to G.K. Chesterton's explanation: "It is a good sign in a nation when things are done badly. It shows that all the people are doing them. And it is bad sign in a nation when such things are done very well, for it shows that only a few experts and eccentrics are doing them, and that the nation is merely looking on." Now read that quote again and substitute the word "church" for "nation":
"It is a good sign in a church when things are done badly. It shows that all the people are doing them. And it is a bad sign in a church when such things are done very well, for it shows that only a few experts and eccentrics are doing them, and that the church is merely looking on."
In most growing and going churches things are not done badly, that's for sure. The emphasis of the attractional church model has been on professional excellence. There is a hired staff doing the ministry, ensuring that it is done right (by "experts and eccentrics"). Professionalism has left the church "merely looking on," instead of as engaged participants. The church growth maxim that quality is the means to quality has ruled out the contributions of millions of believers (that is, except their contribution of money to support the professionals).
I believe that the church is on the front edge of a second reformation. The first reformation placed the word of God into the hands of the people; the second reformation is placing the ministry into the hands of the people. This shift parallels shifts in the culture, where quality is being exchanged for broader participation and diversity.
A good example of this is YouTube. YouTube is not professionally produced television. It is of the people, by the people, for the people. There are hundreds of thousands of contributions coming from average people. Is the quality at the level of Steven Spielberg? Not exactly. YouTube videos are in "the steep part of the curve" in terms of cost and time. But don't underestimate how revolutionary this shift to the amateur is. Ten years ago only professionals could produce a video that could distributed worldwide. Now anyone can do it. Because anyone can do it, anyone does, which leads to exponential growth. When you think about it, everything in our world that is growing exponentially (YouTube, Facebook, Google, etc.) is based on the architecture of participation, not professionalism.
There's a new day coming, where things worth doing are going to be done badly. The first reformation followed the invention of the printing press. The second reformation will follow the invention of the internet.
Wild
Is your ministry domesticated? Is it docile, easy to control, and unlikely to cause trouble? Passive, quiet, unassuming, compliant? Have you tamed it?
I hope not.
G.K. Chesterton in his book Orthodoxy, saw Christianity as the wild kingdom: "The more I considered Christianity, the more I found that while it had established a rule and order, the chief aim of that order was to give room for good things to run wild."
Can we have "good things run wild" in the CTK story?
I hope so.
But it won't happen unless, as Chesterton notes, we "give room." Things don't run wild without room. If we cage people, we can't expect them to run. If we control everything, we don't get wildness, we get compliance.
A church, it seems to me, should provide generous fairways on which people can play the game. I have used the phrase "freedom with handrails" to describe the organizational philosophy of CTK. The handrails are our beliefs (doctrinal statement) and our brand (mission, vision, values). As Chesterton noted, there has to be "rule and order." But the chief aim of boundaries is "to give room for good things to run wild."
How do we as leaders give room for good things to run wild? One of the key ways is to repeat four words: "Yes, Sure, You Bet" to people and their "wild" ideas. Caution is acceptable, but you can't lead with it. Caution needs to come later, in the shaping of things. In a wild kingdom our predisposition needs to be "Yes." Then, we come alongside to train and support.
A second key is to highlight ministries that have been started "in the wild." If you constantly promote the "church sponsored" ministries, you send a signal about what you value. If you constantly promote the idea that everyone is a minister and there are a myriad of ways to reach out, you will be amazed at how creative people can be.
A third thing that I think is key is to validate the craziness that ensues when people go wild doing good. Not everyone is going to know what everyone is doing. There may be small groups forming that you don't even know about! Is this good, or bad? It's good! Stand up and say, "The most awesome thing happened this week! Somebody started a ministry without permission! Yahoo!"
If people can't use the word "wild" to describe your ministry, you might need to change that. At the Burlington Worship Center I sensed a little too much domestication setting in, so in a few weeks we are canceling our Sunday morning services and renting the local roller rink for "Roller Church." I think it will send a clear message that we are not here to "do church." We are here to see that good things run wild.
I hope not.
G.K. Chesterton in his book Orthodoxy, saw Christianity as the wild kingdom: "The more I considered Christianity, the more I found that while it had established a rule and order, the chief aim of that order was to give room for good things to run wild."
Can we have "good things run wild" in the CTK story?
I hope so.
But it won't happen unless, as Chesterton notes, we "give room." Things don't run wild without room. If we cage people, we can't expect them to run. If we control everything, we don't get wildness, we get compliance.
A church, it seems to me, should provide generous fairways on which people can play the game. I have used the phrase "freedom with handrails" to describe the organizational philosophy of CTK. The handrails are our beliefs (doctrinal statement) and our brand (mission, vision, values). As Chesterton noted, there has to be "rule and order." But the chief aim of boundaries is "to give room for good things to run wild."
How do we as leaders give room for good things to run wild? One of the key ways is to repeat four words: "Yes, Sure, You Bet" to people and their "wild" ideas. Caution is acceptable, but you can't lead with it. Caution needs to come later, in the shaping of things. In a wild kingdom our predisposition needs to be "Yes." Then, we come alongside to train and support.
A second key is to highlight ministries that have been started "in the wild." If you constantly promote the "church sponsored" ministries, you send a signal about what you value. If you constantly promote the idea that everyone is a minister and there are a myriad of ways to reach out, you will be amazed at how creative people can be.
A third thing that I think is key is to validate the craziness that ensues when people go wild doing good. Not everyone is going to know what everyone is doing. There may be small groups forming that you don't even know about! Is this good, or bad? It's good! Stand up and say, "The most awesome thing happened this week! Somebody started a ministry without permission! Yahoo!"
If people can't use the word "wild" to describe your ministry, you might need to change that. At the Burlington Worship Center I sensed a little too much domestication setting in, so in a few weeks we are canceling our Sunday morning services and renting the local roller rink for "Roller Church." I think it will send a clear message that we are not here to "do church." We are here to see that good things run wild.
Neutrality
Good leaders pick their battles. In this respect, the founding fathers of America can teach us important lessons.
During their presidencies, both George Washington and John Adams took a path of neutrality in the conflicts between France and England. In fact, the foundation of Washington's foreign policy was the Proclamation of Neutrality (1793) which said that America was going to stay out of the ongoing, hundred year conflict in Europe. Washington declared, "Every true friend to this Country must see and feel that the policy of it is not to embroil ourselves with any nation whatsoever; but to avoid their disputes and politics; and if they will harass one another, to avail ourselves of the neutral conduct we have adopted. Twenty years peace with such an increase in population and resources as we have a right to expect; added to our remote situation from the jarring powers, will in all probability enable us in a just cause to bid defiance to any nation on earth." Clearly, Washington's approach was calculated to allow our fledgling country to become better established, and to keep from squandering precious resources of time and money overseas.
Some have referred to Washington's approach as "the strategy of enlightened procrastination." Sometimes, by not doing anything, you are doing the best thing you can do as a leader.
It is not by accident that CTK is a non-denominational, generic, vanilla evangelical church. It is not by accident that we do not "take a position" on many secondary issues. We have deliberately not entered into many theological skirmishes and debates. We have kept the main thing the main thing. Our only allegiance is to Christ. Our focus is on loving God and people. Neutrality has freed up our time to pursue worship, small groups and outreach as priorities.
There is always a battle of words being fought somewhere in the church world. Be careful to not get sucked in, unless we are talking about an essential doctrine. The energy and time that it will take to engage in a war of words does not give you a return on investment. Remember Augustine's council: "In essential matters unity, in non- essential matters diversity, in all matters charity."
You will occasionally be invited to "join the fray." You will receive letters from organizations that are picking fights with various parts of the body. You will get some emails that tempt you to engage. Remain clear about the ultimate mission. Don't be distracted by lesser concerns.
During their presidencies, both George Washington and John Adams took a path of neutrality in the conflicts between France and England. In fact, the foundation of Washington's foreign policy was the Proclamation of Neutrality (1793) which said that America was going to stay out of the ongoing, hundred year conflict in Europe. Washington declared, "Every true friend to this Country must see and feel that the policy of it is not to embroil ourselves with any nation whatsoever; but to avoid their disputes and politics; and if they will harass one another, to avail ourselves of the neutral conduct we have adopted. Twenty years peace with such an increase in population and resources as we have a right to expect; added to our remote situation from the jarring powers, will in all probability enable us in a just cause to bid defiance to any nation on earth." Clearly, Washington's approach was calculated to allow our fledgling country to become better established, and to keep from squandering precious resources of time and money overseas.
Some have referred to Washington's approach as "the strategy of enlightened procrastination." Sometimes, by not doing anything, you are doing the best thing you can do as a leader.
It is not by accident that CTK is a non-denominational, generic, vanilla evangelical church. It is not by accident that we do not "take a position" on many secondary issues. We have deliberately not entered into many theological skirmishes and debates. We have kept the main thing the main thing. Our only allegiance is to Christ. Our focus is on loving God and people. Neutrality has freed up our time to pursue worship, small groups and outreach as priorities.
There is always a battle of words being fought somewhere in the church world. Be careful to not get sucked in, unless we are talking about an essential doctrine. The energy and time that it will take to engage in a war of words does not give you a return on investment. Remember Augustine's council: "In essential matters unity, in non- essential matters diversity, in all matters charity."
You will occasionally be invited to "join the fray." You will receive letters from organizations that are picking fights with various parts of the body. You will get some emails that tempt you to engage. Remain clear about the ultimate mission. Don't be distracted by lesser concerns.
Filing
I was talking with a potential young pastor recently, and the subject turned to teaching. He asked me if I would mind sharing with him how I put a message together. He approached his request very cautiously, almost as if it were a trade secret. Of course I told him about the process I go through each week (which, by the way, I explain in detail in a course through CTK called Connecting the Dots). But one of his key follow-up questions was how I was able to recall various analogies, quotes or illustrations I might use in a message, what I call (TPOV - teachable points of view). I told him, "I don't. " It's all in a file somewhere," and I encouraged him strongly to begin his own filing system.
We are all exposed to plenty of TPOV on a daily basis. They key is capturing this material and filing it in a way that you can access it when you need it. You hear a funny remark on the radio and you think, "I'll have to try to remember that." You hear someone share something from their life and you think "I should probably right that down." You read something in a magazine and you think "Wow, that would work well in a message some day." But unless you write it down and file it, all of these great TPOVs are lost. If, however, you become disciplined about writing and filing these TPOV, you will be richly endowed with plenty of colorful material when you need it.
I have an alphabetical file system by topic. If I read an article about raising difficult kids, I might file that under "Children" or "Parents." I simply write the topic in the margin and pull the page (if a magazine) or photocopy it (if a book). If I don't already have a file by that name, I create one. If I want to cross reference a file, I simple put a 3x5 card in the other file (for example, if I filed the article under Children, I might put a 3x5 card that says "Children" in the Parenting file). Pretty simple really. Over the years, I have built this system to where I know have 16 full file drawer cabinets, A-Z. You can do the same thing. Start now.
Everyone knows Alan Lakein's classic mantra, "Handle each piece of paper only once." Good advice, although if you were to see my desk right now you'd be asking me to practice what I preach. Instead of letting things pile up there are four things that you can do with a piece of paper, that spell FART (this should be memorable):
File it
Act on it
Refer it (give it to someone else)
Toss it
Once you begin to FART you will feel so much better. (If you've read this far and think this is funny, please reply. This will be a good test to see how many people are actually reading this stuff.)
Filing well can give you a big advantage over those who don't. After all, success is not usually found in doing something that no one else can do. It is usually found in doing something anyone can do, but doesn't.
We are all exposed to plenty of TPOV on a daily basis. They key is capturing this material and filing it in a way that you can access it when you need it. You hear a funny remark on the radio and you think, "I'll have to try to remember that." You hear someone share something from their life and you think "I should probably right that down." You read something in a magazine and you think "Wow, that would work well in a message some day." But unless you write it down and file it, all of these great TPOVs are lost. If, however, you become disciplined about writing and filing these TPOV, you will be richly endowed with plenty of colorful material when you need it.
I have an alphabetical file system by topic. If I read an article about raising difficult kids, I might file that under "Children" or "Parents." I simply write the topic in the margin and pull the page (if a magazine) or photocopy it (if a book). If I don't already have a file by that name, I create one. If I want to cross reference a file, I simple put a 3x5 card in the other file (for example, if I filed the article under Children, I might put a 3x5 card that says "Children" in the Parenting file). Pretty simple really. Over the years, I have built this system to where I know have 16 full file drawer cabinets, A-Z. You can do the same thing. Start now.
Everyone knows Alan Lakein's classic mantra, "Handle each piece of paper only once." Good advice, although if you were to see my desk right now you'd be asking me to practice what I preach. Instead of letting things pile up there are four things that you can do with a piece of paper, that spell FART (this should be memorable):
File it
Act on it
Refer it (give it to someone else)
Toss it
Once you begin to FART you will feel so much better. (If you've read this far and think this is funny, please reply. This will be a good test to see how many people are actually reading this stuff.)
Filing well can give you a big advantage over those who don't. After all, success is not usually found in doing something that no one else can do. It is usually found in doing something anyone can do, but doesn't.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
