There are great ministries all around us, and we can learn a lot from other Christian leaders and churches. But Peter Senge, in his book The Fifth Discipline, encourages us to try to glean transferable "disciplines" rather than models or practices:
"Practicing a discipline is different from emulating "a model." All too often, new management innovations are described in terms of the "best practices" of so-called leading firms. While interesting, I believe such descriptions can often do more harm than good, leading to piecemeal copying and playing catch-up. I do not believe great organizations have ever been built by trying to emulate another, any more than individual greatness in achieved by trying to copy another 'great person.'"
I believe that every ministry story has its own personality, unlike any other. If this is true, the key for leaders is to not so much script a story as to discern the nature of the story in which a leader finds himself. At the end of the day, every ministry is custom built to unique specifications, and the blueprints are not transferable to another job site. There may be ways in which you ministry resembles others, and that is ok. But there should also be ways in which your ministry is unlike any other one in the world. Embrace the uniqueness of what God wants to do in your situation. Some might call it walking by faith.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
Collectivism
The Christian philosopher Francis Schaeffer has said that there are no small churches and no big pastors. Nevertheless, it does take a “big” pastor to cooperate with another pastor, and a “big” church to cooperate with another church in the building of Christ’s kingdom.
Clay Shirky suggests a hierarchy of social arrangements—sharing, cooperation, collaboration, and collectivism—that can bring us together. There is increasing coordination with each step. Sharing involves things. Cooperation involves ideas. Collaboration involves projects. And collectivism involves vision. The sequence of these steps is quite logical. But even before you get to the first step, there is a preliminary threshold you must clear: communication.
One thing is for sure: interdependence is hard, wherever it is attempted. I’m a fan of marriage, but when you think of it, it is a really challenging proposition. Marriage is two people, of different genders, from two different families, trying to do life together as a unit. Good luck with that, especially when visions collide. Everything is cool until the visions vary, and then cool quickly becomes hot. It’s a collision course that I’m not sure can be negotiated, at least in our own strength. But God is not beyond asking us to do something that can’t be done apart from His help. In the movie A League of Their Own, Tom Hanks’s character responds to a complaint of hardship by saying, “Hard is what makes it great!” Perhaps the best part of coordination is what God will have to do in us for it to happen.
To validate those whose ministry is different from ours, we need to recognize, rejoice in, and report on what God is doing throughout the world, particularly in ways that are different from what we’re used to doing or are doing. His work is much bigger than any of us. Other churches can reach people that your church cannot, and in ways that your church does not. Do I hear an Amen? Validate the thing that is different from you, maybe the opposite of you. For those of us in less structured, organic settings, it might mean expressing thanks for the ministries that are programmatic, institutional, or traditional. For those of us in a church that is traditionally organized, it might mean expressing thanks for those who are less structured in their approach. When was the last time you said to a pastor of another church, “I thank God for what you are doing over there”?
In our CTK services, I like to pray publicly for the other churches in the community. I think it sends an important message that there are other family members around that have valid ministries, even though their perspectives may differ from ours. As I pray for different denominations by name, I can sometimes discern that some of “our” people are squirming. We have done too good a job of differentiating ourselves from other churches, and not a good enough job of communicating our mutual dependence. But this can change. Sheep are prone to follow. And if they have followed us to independence, I believe they will also follow us toward interdependence.
The slogan we need for the church in America is the one printed on our money: E pluribus unum (out of many, one). At times in the church, there has been too much pluribus and not enough unum. Of course, the Lord’s Prayer (not the one He taught us to pray, but the one He actually prayed) was for unity. As Christ is praying for unity, there is also an enemy roaming who is intent on division. C. S. Lewis, in The Great Divorce, illustrates this point as he recounts a bus ride from heaven to hell. Instead of finding fire in hell, he finds a neighborhood full of empty homes on deserted streets. Lewis asks what has happened, and he gets a chilling answer. There used to be a great population in hell, he is told, but on the first day when someone would arrive, he would start quarreling with his neighbor, and within a week he would move to another block. Of course, someone else would move in next to him in that neighborhood as well. So the person would have to move again to get away from his neighbors. This cycle was repeated many times, until the person had moved to the edge of town, where he had to build another house. And that was hell—a constant drive to get away from others. Hell meant growing—rapidly—apart. That is a metaphor for hell on earth, and also an indicator of what heaven on earth must be like: coming together.
Clay Shirky suggests a hierarchy of social arrangements—sharing, cooperation, collaboration, and collectivism—that can bring us together. There is increasing coordination with each step. Sharing involves things. Cooperation involves ideas. Collaboration involves projects. And collectivism involves vision. The sequence of these steps is quite logical. But even before you get to the first step, there is a preliminary threshold you must clear: communication.
One thing is for sure: interdependence is hard, wherever it is attempted. I’m a fan of marriage, but when you think of it, it is a really challenging proposition. Marriage is two people, of different genders, from two different families, trying to do life together as a unit. Good luck with that, especially when visions collide. Everything is cool until the visions vary, and then cool quickly becomes hot. It’s a collision course that I’m not sure can be negotiated, at least in our own strength. But God is not beyond asking us to do something that can’t be done apart from His help. In the movie A League of Their Own, Tom Hanks’s character responds to a complaint of hardship by saying, “Hard is what makes it great!” Perhaps the best part of coordination is what God will have to do in us for it to happen.
To validate those whose ministry is different from ours, we need to recognize, rejoice in, and report on what God is doing throughout the world, particularly in ways that are different from what we’re used to doing or are doing. His work is much bigger than any of us. Other churches can reach people that your church cannot, and in ways that your church does not. Do I hear an Amen? Validate the thing that is different from you, maybe the opposite of you. For those of us in less structured, organic settings, it might mean expressing thanks for the ministries that are programmatic, institutional, or traditional. For those of us in a church that is traditionally organized, it might mean expressing thanks for those who are less structured in their approach. When was the last time you said to a pastor of another church, “I thank God for what you are doing over there”?
In our CTK services, I like to pray publicly for the other churches in the community. I think it sends an important message that there are other family members around that have valid ministries, even though their perspectives may differ from ours. As I pray for different denominations by name, I can sometimes discern that some of “our” people are squirming. We have done too good a job of differentiating ourselves from other churches, and not a good enough job of communicating our mutual dependence. But this can change. Sheep are prone to follow. And if they have followed us to independence, I believe they will also follow us toward interdependence.
The slogan we need for the church in America is the one printed on our money: E pluribus unum (out of many, one). At times in the church, there has been too much pluribus and not enough unum. Of course, the Lord’s Prayer (not the one He taught us to pray, but the one He actually prayed) was for unity. As Christ is praying for unity, there is also an enemy roaming who is intent on division. C. S. Lewis, in The Great Divorce, illustrates this point as he recounts a bus ride from heaven to hell. Instead of finding fire in hell, he finds a neighborhood full of empty homes on deserted streets. Lewis asks what has happened, and he gets a chilling answer. There used to be a great population in hell, he is told, but on the first day when someone would arrive, he would start quarreling with his neighbor, and within a week he would move to another block. Of course, someone else would move in next to him in that neighborhood as well. So the person would have to move again to get away from his neighbors. This cycle was repeated many times, until the person had moved to the edge of town, where he had to build another house. And that was hell—a constant drive to get away from others. Hell meant growing—rapidly—apart. That is a metaphor for hell on earth, and also an indicator of what heaven on earth must be like: coming together.
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
Affirmation
A friend of mine said something pretty interesting to me: "I came to my first pastorate looking for a group of people who would affirm me. But what they were looking for was someone who could lead them to hope in Jesus."
I found this to be an especially honest reflection. The fact is, a person can find a fair amount of affirmation in ministry. Maybe you've heard this before: "Thank you Pastor. That was just what I needed to hear!" Or this: "That was such a beautiful prayer." Or: "I want you to know that you are a blessing to me." God's people can be awfully kind sometimes. When I was a young pastor I didn't know what to do with the encouragement, so on the surface I was way too godly: "All the glory goes to Jesus sister!" Meanwhile the "internal me" was far too human. Secretly I would look forward to these comments far too much and feel like I was going through withdrawal when they were not forthcoming. I think I've grown a little since then.
1. I got clear that my ministry is unto the Lord and people are just the beneficiary of that, instead of the other way around.
2. I started living for the ultimate, final affirmation - "well done good and faithful servant" - instead of the temporal, passing affirmations.
3. I understood that the same people who shout "Hosanna!" on one day will cry "crucify him!" days later. If I put too much stock in the compliments it is harder to divest myself of the criticism.
4. I realized that the truth was somewhere in the middle - I'm not quite as good as my best day and not quite as bad as my worst day. While people tend to notice the unusually good or bad, I've tried to put more energy into raising my average.
5. I got clear that "It is not about me." Truly, as my friend said, I just need to be a finger pointing to Jesus.
As I began to grow in my character something interesting started happening in my response to affirmation. I started saying, "Thank you, I appreciate that" to compliments, but in my self talk reminding myself that I am holding treasure in a jar of clay. I'm doing much better, if I do say so myself.
I found this to be an especially honest reflection. The fact is, a person can find a fair amount of affirmation in ministry. Maybe you've heard this before: "Thank you Pastor. That was just what I needed to hear!" Or this: "That was such a beautiful prayer." Or: "I want you to know that you are a blessing to me." God's people can be awfully kind sometimes. When I was a young pastor I didn't know what to do with the encouragement, so on the surface I was way too godly: "All the glory goes to Jesus sister!" Meanwhile the "internal me" was far too human. Secretly I would look forward to these comments far too much and feel like I was going through withdrawal when they were not forthcoming. I think I've grown a little since then.
1. I got clear that my ministry is unto the Lord and people are just the beneficiary of that, instead of the other way around.
2. I started living for the ultimate, final affirmation - "well done good and faithful servant" - instead of the temporal, passing affirmations.
3. I understood that the same people who shout "Hosanna!" on one day will cry "crucify him!" days later. If I put too much stock in the compliments it is harder to divest myself of the criticism.
4. I realized that the truth was somewhere in the middle - I'm not quite as good as my best day and not quite as bad as my worst day. While people tend to notice the unusually good or bad, I've tried to put more energy into raising my average.
5. I got clear that "It is not about me." Truly, as my friend said, I just need to be a finger pointing to Jesus.
As I began to grow in my character something interesting started happening in my response to affirmation. I started saying, "Thank you, I appreciate that" to compliments, but in my self talk reminding myself that I am holding treasure in a jar of clay. I'm doing much better, if I do say so myself.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Sampling
Post cereal introduced product sampling to American commerce. The concept is simple; before someone commits to a larger purchase, let them try it first. After the concept caught on, it expanded significantly, with test drives, introductory offers, and money-back guarantees. Maybe the church could learn a thing or two.
I learned something about sampling recently when a man called and set up an appointment to talk with me. He said he wanted to talk with me about the church. I found this odd, since I knew this man from the community and had never seen him attend one of our services. In fact, he hadn't. But when he showed up for our meeting he was carrying with him all manner of CTK literature: brochures, DVDs and printed pages from our web site. He even had a dog-eared copy of Deliberate Simplicity with him. He was studying up on us, he said, because he wanted to know what we were all about before he came for a visit. The care he took in his investigation was every bit as intensive as that of Consumer Reports. He had particular ideas about what he was looking for, and he was not even going to visit until his curiosity was satisfied.
Clearly my friend is an "outlier" when it comes to being an information hound. But in an info society, where people are used to being able to browse a book online before buying it, or play a clip of a song before downloading it, it makes sense that the church provide options beyond "attend the service and you'll find out." So here are some questions:
Does your ministry provide samples of recent teaching? How about a video or audio of a recent service? Handouts? Maybe a copy of the Sunday program? Giving people a sample will make them feel that they already know you, before you even meet.
Does your ministry give guests pictures of what they can expect to see when they visit? Is there a map of the facility that they can peruse? Some may be worried about "what's behind those doors." Put their mind at ease. Take a few snapshots of the entry, hallways and auditorium so it's not such a mystery. Remember, people are already used to zooming in on buildings through Google earth and getting a roadside view. Let them come inside before they come inside.
Does your ministry allow people to "meet" some of the important people before they meet them? Is there a brochure of the directors? Are there bios on the web site? Maybe you think it's obvious who the worship director is, but for newbies they are wondering, "Who's the guy who gets up there every week and plays his guitar?"
Does your ministry give people a chance to "try" a small group, before committing to one? Some are skeptical about jumping into community with both feet. Maybe we should whet their appetite for it, by offering 5-10 minute small group opportunities in the worship service, or limited-duration groups that let people get their feet wet first.
Don't allow the enemy to use the fear of the unknown to keep seekers at bay. Give people a chance to "taste and see that the Lord is good." Sampling is a preventative strike at fear.
I learned something about sampling recently when a man called and set up an appointment to talk with me. He said he wanted to talk with me about the church. I found this odd, since I knew this man from the community and had never seen him attend one of our services. In fact, he hadn't. But when he showed up for our meeting he was carrying with him all manner of CTK literature: brochures, DVDs and printed pages from our web site. He even had a dog-eared copy of Deliberate Simplicity with him. He was studying up on us, he said, because he wanted to know what we were all about before he came for a visit. The care he took in his investigation was every bit as intensive as that of Consumer Reports. He had particular ideas about what he was looking for, and he was not even going to visit until his curiosity was satisfied.
Clearly my friend is an "outlier" when it comes to being an information hound. But in an info society, where people are used to being able to browse a book online before buying it, or play a clip of a song before downloading it, it makes sense that the church provide options beyond "attend the service and you'll find out." So here are some questions:
Does your ministry provide samples of recent teaching? How about a video or audio of a recent service? Handouts? Maybe a copy of the Sunday program? Giving people a sample will make them feel that they already know you, before you even meet.
Does your ministry give guests pictures of what they can expect to see when they visit? Is there a map of the facility that they can peruse? Some may be worried about "what's behind those doors." Put their mind at ease. Take a few snapshots of the entry, hallways and auditorium so it's not such a mystery. Remember, people are already used to zooming in on buildings through Google earth and getting a roadside view. Let them come inside before they come inside.
Does your ministry allow people to "meet" some of the important people before they meet them? Is there a brochure of the directors? Are there bios on the web site? Maybe you think it's obvious who the worship director is, but for newbies they are wondering, "Who's the guy who gets up there every week and plays his guitar?"
Does your ministry give people a chance to "try" a small group, before committing to one? Some are skeptical about jumping into community with both feet. Maybe we should whet their appetite for it, by offering 5-10 minute small group opportunities in the worship service, or limited-duration groups that let people get their feet wet first.
Don't allow the enemy to use the fear of the unknown to keep seekers at bay. Give people a chance to "taste and see that the Lord is good." Sampling is a preventative strike at fear.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Honest
Jesus said, "Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes' and you 'No' be 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one." Jesus encouraged an honest life that has eluded many Christian leaders. I find many leaders are frustrated, saying "Yes" when they mean "No," then resenting others for it. The anger stems from a lack of honesty with themselves, first of all, then with others.
It is dangerous to your health to be a "yes man." Jesus gave us permission to say both yes and no. I know this is hard for some Christians to believe, but sometimes the best answer is "No." We have a limited amount of emotions, time, money and strength. When someone asks you to engage, and you don't have the emotional strength to do so, the answer needs to be "No." When someone asks you to participate, but you don't have the time, the answer needs to be "No." When someone asks you to contribute, but you don't have the money, the answer needs to be "No." When someone asks you to help, but you don't have the strength, the answer needs to be "No." And Jesus says you don't have to explain or excuse yourself either. Just say "No, I'm sorry, I can't." Let your "No" be "No."
If you really want to frustrate the rest of us, keep saying "Yes" when you should be saying "No." After awhile it will become clear that you don't really have the ability (emotions, time, money, strength) to follow through on your commitments (ummm....overcommitments) and we will start wishing that you had just been honest with us to begin with: "If you didn't have the time, I wish you just would have told me." Other people cannot read your mind, so when you say "Yes" they actually assume you mean "Yes," with all that attends that word.
I was once doing marriage counseling with a couple, and finding it very difficult to make any progress, until one session the wife turned to her husband and blurted out, "I don't love you. I haven't loved you for a long time." It was a difficult session, but in some ways it was a turning point. The husband, afterward, told me, "It was hard to hear that, but I needed to hear that." Up until her statement neither of us could figure out why the pieces were not coming together. She had said that she loved him, so we both took her word for it. The minute she got honest, the marriage had a chance at survival. Prior to that statement, we weren't even working on helping her to love him, because that had been assumed. Once we knew that she did not love him, we could go to work on that. And we did. And she did. And eventually that marriage came back together. But it required honesty to get there.
If we as leaders don't show a degree of care with our "Yes" and "No" we can unwittingly show our people how to become really good at being dishonest, and subsequently, unhealthy. After all, we are as sick as our secrets.
It is dangerous to your health to be a "yes man." Jesus gave us permission to say both yes and no. I know this is hard for some Christians to believe, but sometimes the best answer is "No." We have a limited amount of emotions, time, money and strength. When someone asks you to engage, and you don't have the emotional strength to do so, the answer needs to be "No." When someone asks you to participate, but you don't have the time, the answer needs to be "No." When someone asks you to contribute, but you don't have the money, the answer needs to be "No." When someone asks you to help, but you don't have the strength, the answer needs to be "No." And Jesus says you don't have to explain or excuse yourself either. Just say "No, I'm sorry, I can't." Let your "No" be "No."
If you really want to frustrate the rest of us, keep saying "Yes" when you should be saying "No." After awhile it will become clear that you don't really have the ability (emotions, time, money, strength) to follow through on your commitments (ummm....overcommitments) and we will start wishing that you had just been honest with us to begin with: "If you didn't have the time, I wish you just would have told me." Other people cannot read your mind, so when you say "Yes" they actually assume you mean "Yes," with all that attends that word.
I was once doing marriage counseling with a couple, and finding it very difficult to make any progress, until one session the wife turned to her husband and blurted out, "I don't love you. I haven't loved you for a long time." It was a difficult session, but in some ways it was a turning point. The husband, afterward, told me, "It was hard to hear that, but I needed to hear that." Up until her statement neither of us could figure out why the pieces were not coming together. She had said that she loved him, so we both took her word for it. The minute she got honest, the marriage had a chance at survival. Prior to that statement, we weren't even working on helping her to love him, because that had been assumed. Once we knew that she did not love him, we could go to work on that. And we did. And she did. And eventually that marriage came back together. But it required honesty to get there.
If we as leaders don't show a degree of care with our "Yes" and "No" we can unwittingly show our people how to become really good at being dishonest, and subsequently, unhealthy. After all, we are as sick as our secrets.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Hybrid
When you encounter a CTK participant (we don’t have “members” but “active participants”), you will hear them tell different stories about what they appreciate about CTK. One might say, “This is the first church where I have really gotten to know people, and where people have gotten to know me. I have grown so much because of my small group.” Another might add, “I enjoy the weekend worship services. I feel the presence of God when we get together.” Still another might say, “I love the fact that we are reaching out and starting new Worship Centers in new communities.” The point being, we are not all one thing, or another. We are both intimate and impacting. We are Hybrid.
Intimacy…when the church is personal, relational and inclusive.
Impact…when the church is powerful, missional and transformative.
Hybrids are sometimes a transition between one methodology and another. In between epics, we often find transitional forms with one hand reaching into the past, and the other reaching forward to the future. This is likely true for the automotive industry, as refined fossil fuels become less plentiful, and new forms of power, like electric and hydrogen, become more useful. Some would see the Hybrid Church in this light, as a way station between the corporate church (viewed to be analogous to the combustion engine, a popular but endangered species) and smaller house fellowships they project will ultimately replace it.
I personally do not view the Hybrid Church as a transitional form. I view it as a preferred design. That is, we may prefer a hybrid because it brings together two things in a way that is synergistic. The peanut butter and jelly sandwich, for example, is a long-time favorite hybrid. We prefer the two together because the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. When the church combines intimacy and impact it gets the best of both worlds.
Intimacy…when the church is personal, relational and inclusive.
Impact…when the church is powerful, missional and transformative.
Hybrids are sometimes a transition between one methodology and another. In between epics, we often find transitional forms with one hand reaching into the past, and the other reaching forward to the future. This is likely true for the automotive industry, as refined fossil fuels become less plentiful, and new forms of power, like electric and hydrogen, become more useful. Some would see the Hybrid Church in this light, as a way station between the corporate church (viewed to be analogous to the combustion engine, a popular but endangered species) and smaller house fellowships they project will ultimately replace it.
I personally do not view the Hybrid Church as a transitional form. I view it as a preferred design. That is, we may prefer a hybrid because it brings together two things in a way that is synergistic. The peanut butter and jelly sandwich, for example, is a long-time favorite hybrid. We prefer the two together because the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. When the church combines intimacy and impact it gets the best of both worlds.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Both
At a conference I attended, the facilitator said: "It's more important to be kind than to be right." At first blush the statement resonated with me. I’ve certainly seen rightness expressed at the expense of kindness. But upon further reflection I think it was unfortunate that the conversation was being framed as "kind" versus "right." Can’t we be both? I think a better statement for the facilitator of this meeting to make would have been, "It is important to be right. It is just as important to be kind."
It’s ok to be extreme, but it’s not ok to be imbalanced. It was said of Abraham Lincoln that he was "a man of steel and velvet," extremely strong at the core with a very gentle exterior. It was said of Christ that he was “full of grace and truth,” completely truthful, but clearly gracious. That is what I want to be when I grow up. Both. And that is God’s dream for all of us in His church, that when we grow up we will “speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:7-16). Greatness appears to be balanced extremes.
Balance is not very sexy, or cool. What is deemed newsworthy is often excessive in one direction or the other. The media tends to amplify the highly unlikely outliers, and tends to minimize the middler. This is true in Christianity, as well. The ministry that is extremely (and then fill-in-the-blank…large, evangelistic, Calvinistic, dogmatic, etc.) gets noticed. But for long-term effectiveness balance yields the best results, in your personal life and in your ministry.
A wise, older pastor advised me in my youth to “Lean against the prevailing wind.” He had used this phrase as a sextant for his personal life, leadership and teaching. He counseled, “If you find yourself preaching about grace all the time, maybe balance that with a message on holiness; if you’ve focused for a while on outreach, teach on discipleship.” So much of spirituality, he told me, is both/and, not either/or.
It’s ok to be extreme, but it’s not ok to be imbalanced. It was said of Abraham Lincoln that he was "a man of steel and velvet," extremely strong at the core with a very gentle exterior. It was said of Christ that he was “full of grace and truth,” completely truthful, but clearly gracious. That is what I want to be when I grow up. Both. And that is God’s dream for all of us in His church, that when we grow up we will “speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:7-16). Greatness appears to be balanced extremes.
Balance is not very sexy, or cool. What is deemed newsworthy is often excessive in one direction or the other. The media tends to amplify the highly unlikely outliers, and tends to minimize the middler. This is true in Christianity, as well. The ministry that is extremely (and then fill-in-the-blank…large, evangelistic, Calvinistic, dogmatic, etc.) gets noticed. But for long-term effectiveness balance yields the best results, in your personal life and in your ministry.
A wise, older pastor advised me in my youth to “Lean against the prevailing wind.” He had used this phrase as a sextant for his personal life, leadership and teaching. He counseled, “If you find yourself preaching about grace all the time, maybe balance that with a message on holiness; if you’ve focused for a while on outreach, teach on discipleship.” So much of spirituality, he told me, is both/and, not either/or.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Pencil
The Bible is written in ink. Everything else should be in pencil.
I say this because I found out something interesting on the way to the ball. People sometimes like to take what I say as gospel, as if it came off of Mount Sinai. For instance: Deliberate Simplicity. I wrote Deliberate Simplicity because I found the story of CTK to be virtuous and empowering. The priorities of CTK - Worship, Small Groups, Outreach - resonate with Jesus' prioritization: love the Lord with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself. I believe we have found great benefit in "keeping the main thing the main thing." But Deliberate Simplicity is an application of the word of God, not the word of God itself.
Jesus asked us to love each other. The primary way we have applied that principle is to organize into small groups for friendship, growth, encouragement and outreach. But small groups are not the only way in which we can love each other. They are "a" way, and a great way, but not the only way. It would be a mistake for us to make small groups out to be a command of Christ. They are an application of the command. I have a friend who is very well connected to other Christian friends. Her family and two to three other families regularly "hang out." They pray for each other. They encourage each other. They meet each other's needs. It is very practical and profound. They are carrying out the "one-anothers" of Scripture. It would be a mistake for me to require her to "get into a small group." In fact, it would miss the point entirely. The point of small groups is so that we do life together. They are doing that; perhaps so well that we all could learn something from them. Small groups are our primary method, but behind the emphasis on groups is a Biblical principle of relationships. It is the principle that is paramount, not the program.
The word of God is eternal. We run into problems when we try to make things that are not timeless, timeless. We run into problems when we take our program and try to make it the formula. Formulism is fundamentalism applied to practice. Remember, if we wrote it, it's in pencil.
I say this because I found out something interesting on the way to the ball. People sometimes like to take what I say as gospel, as if it came off of Mount Sinai. For instance: Deliberate Simplicity. I wrote Deliberate Simplicity because I found the story of CTK to be virtuous and empowering. The priorities of CTK - Worship, Small Groups, Outreach - resonate with Jesus' prioritization: love the Lord with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself. I believe we have found great benefit in "keeping the main thing the main thing." But Deliberate Simplicity is an application of the word of God, not the word of God itself.
Jesus asked us to love each other. The primary way we have applied that principle is to organize into small groups for friendship, growth, encouragement and outreach. But small groups are not the only way in which we can love each other. They are "a" way, and a great way, but not the only way. It would be a mistake for us to make small groups out to be a command of Christ. They are an application of the command. I have a friend who is very well connected to other Christian friends. Her family and two to three other families regularly "hang out." They pray for each other. They encourage each other. They meet each other's needs. It is very practical and profound. They are carrying out the "one-anothers" of Scripture. It would be a mistake for me to require her to "get into a small group." In fact, it would miss the point entirely. The point of small groups is so that we do life together. They are doing that; perhaps so well that we all could learn something from them. Small groups are our primary method, but behind the emphasis on groups is a Biblical principle of relationships. It is the principle that is paramount, not the program.
The word of God is eternal. We run into problems when we try to make things that are not timeless, timeless. We run into problems when we take our program and try to make it the formula. Formulism is fundamentalism applied to practice. Remember, if we wrote it, it's in pencil.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Amnesia
I have a low-cost solution to propose for our current health care crisis. A great awakening. Returning to God. Revival. That should solve it.
About 70% of health care costs deal with behavioral choices, from homosexuality to junk food. A physician might call it "lung cancer." Others might say it's reaping what cigarettes have sown. A doctor might diagnose it as diabetes. Another word that might work is "gluttony." A specialist might call it liver disease. A prophet would call it drunkenness. So much of what ails us physically has a deeper root. Unfortunately, our society has become sophisticatedly ignorant. We are experiencing moral amnesia. As I complain to my doctor about my aching knees, I conveniently overlook the fifty pound tummy that those knees are being asked to carry, and the late night bowls of ice cream that were penultimate. I am not the greatest example of taking care of myself. And I guess that's my point. We're asking our health care system to change, and do better. Maybe we should be the ones doing the changing. But first we have to wake up to what's really going on, and quit holding to the unscriptural idea that we can sow personal destructiveness, and somehow, someway have the corporate health care system get a different crop to come in (and by the way, we don't want to pay as much for this modern miracle).
When I told someone recently that I had a personal goal of taking better care of myself, they said something that was very politically incorrect. They said, "Food addiction is the only 'acceptable' addiction in the Christian community." Alcohol? Nope. Pornography? No way. Gambling? No go. Potato Chips? Now that's a tolerable sin! She went on to say that "it is only at a church potluck where a 350 pound person can go back for their fourth plate of food and no one will bat an eyelash." Ok, now you've stepped over the line! That is getting dangerously close to hurting my feelings. But all joking aside, the Old Testament prophets often scoffed at the futility of mankind trying to "perfume the pile" - to make sin smell better. In so many ways it is time for our country, but particularly God's people, to shake off our amnesia. Spiritual problems cannot be solved with political, medical, or psychological solutions. We simply can't come up with enough ingenuity to keep from reaping what we sow.
About 70% of health care costs deal with behavioral choices, from homosexuality to junk food. A physician might call it "lung cancer." Others might say it's reaping what cigarettes have sown. A doctor might diagnose it as diabetes. Another word that might work is "gluttony." A specialist might call it liver disease. A prophet would call it drunkenness. So much of what ails us physically has a deeper root. Unfortunately, our society has become sophisticatedly ignorant. We are experiencing moral amnesia. As I complain to my doctor about my aching knees, I conveniently overlook the fifty pound tummy that those knees are being asked to carry, and the late night bowls of ice cream that were penultimate. I am not the greatest example of taking care of myself. And I guess that's my point. We're asking our health care system to change, and do better. Maybe we should be the ones doing the changing. But first we have to wake up to what's really going on, and quit holding to the unscriptural idea that we can sow personal destructiveness, and somehow, someway have the corporate health care system get a different crop to come in (and by the way, we don't want to pay as much for this modern miracle).
When I told someone recently that I had a personal goal of taking better care of myself, they said something that was very politically incorrect. They said, "Food addiction is the only 'acceptable' addiction in the Christian community." Alcohol? Nope. Pornography? No way. Gambling? No go. Potato Chips? Now that's a tolerable sin! She went on to say that "it is only at a church potluck where a 350 pound person can go back for their fourth plate of food and no one will bat an eyelash." Ok, now you've stepped over the line! That is getting dangerously close to hurting my feelings. But all joking aside, the Old Testament prophets often scoffed at the futility of mankind trying to "perfume the pile" - to make sin smell better. In so many ways it is time for our country, but particularly God's people, to shake off our amnesia. Spiritual problems cannot be solved with political, medical, or psychological solutions. We simply can't come up with enough ingenuity to keep from reaping what we sow.
Monday, December 07, 2009
Atrophy
Was meeting with an associate pastor recently, who had been in business for himself prior to entering vocational ministry. He expressed interested in becoming a senior or lead pastor. When I asked him why he wanted to take that step he said, "Because I have some entrepreneurial instincts, and I'm afraid that if I am not in a position to take risks that those instincts will atrophy and I will lose them." I found that to be a very insightful answer. Faith is a muscle that needs to be exercised or else you'll lose it.
The way to keep walking by faith is to keep walking by faith. If you succumb to fear, you will become more likely to succumb to fear. Harry Truman said, "The worst danger we face is being paralyzed by doubts and fears." If fear takes over, paralysis sets in. There is actually a "fear cycle": Fear leads to Inaction; Inaction leads to Inexperience; Inexperience leads to Inability; Inability leads to greater fear, and the cycle repeats and reinforces itself. If you feel this cycle setting in (as this associate pastor did) you need to take action. You need to take a step of faith.
Jim Collins has written a book called How the Mighty Fall. A few years ago he wrote a hugely popular book entitled Good to Great, about how good companies became great companies. This latest book is about how good companies have become bad companies, that have trended downward instead of upward. Why? Because they were unwilling to take risks. Why? Because they were afraid. The president and the board went into protective mode and were no longer willing to step out. In the process, they lost it. Reminds me of what Jesus said, "Those who save their lives will lose it. The one who loses his life for my sake will find it." Fortunately there are warning signs. Before you die, atrophy starts to set in.
The way to keep walking by faith is to keep walking by faith. If you succumb to fear, you will become more likely to succumb to fear. Harry Truman said, "The worst danger we face is being paralyzed by doubts and fears." If fear takes over, paralysis sets in. There is actually a "fear cycle": Fear leads to Inaction; Inaction leads to Inexperience; Inexperience leads to Inability; Inability leads to greater fear, and the cycle repeats and reinforces itself. If you feel this cycle setting in (as this associate pastor did) you need to take action. You need to take a step of faith.
Jim Collins has written a book called How the Mighty Fall. A few years ago he wrote a hugely popular book entitled Good to Great, about how good companies became great companies. This latest book is about how good companies have become bad companies, that have trended downward instead of upward. Why? Because they were unwilling to take risks. Why? Because they were afraid. The president and the board went into protective mode and were no longer willing to step out. In the process, they lost it. Reminds me of what Jesus said, "Those who save their lives will lose it. The one who loses his life for my sake will find it." Fortunately there are warning signs. Before you die, atrophy starts to set in.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Reactionary
There is a difference between responding and reacting. When problems arise you want to respond, but you don't want to react. And you definitely don't want to be reactionary.
When organizations get reactionary they tend to solve an immediate problem, but create additional unforeseen difficulties in the process (which will be experienced by far more people down the road). The government has become great at this, but churches aren't too far behind. An example of reactionary governance? Our Worship Center in Burlington is applying for a Conditional Use Permit to renovate a warehouse into worship space. Simple enough, right? Not necessarily. When the building department looked at the auditorium size they were initially concerned that we could put too many people in it, especially if every one was standing (yes, I know that most people sit down in church, but I'll get to that in a minute). Where did the concern about standing room come from? A local tavern. Evidently on some Friday nights this local tavern is packed, beyond capacity, with everyone standing. Unfortunately for us, we put in our use application at the same time that the city was trying to deal with the "packed tavern problem." How are they thinking about solving it? A neighboring community solves the problem by having taverns bolt down their tables, so that they can't be pushed out of the way. So our city's recommendation to us? How about bolted-down pews! Their reasoning is if we have pews we cannot have a standing room crowd, thus eliminating the tavern concern, which has become their concern, and by extension now, our concern. Of course, we are not going to put in pews, and I think we're going to be able to negotiate this "problem," but I raise this story because this is the type of nonsensical stuff that many churches pull. And we as leaders in the church need to resist this type of creeping bureaucracy!
The past six months there has been a "pull" on me to put more regulation into the CTK story, particularly around the area of leadership qualifications. This has come from well-meaning people who have been hurt by leaders who have presented themselves to be one thing, but in actuality were another. I have personally been witness to the devastation that disingenuous leaders have caused. But this is where we want to respond and not to react. To respond means that we deal with our fallen brothers directly, and we bring them into a process of accountability and restoration. To react would mean reorganizing the entire church, or writing a policy manual, or instituting regulations, to "keep this from every happening again." Frankly, I've left heel marks behind resisting the impulse to kill a gnat with a cannon. I think we HAVE to resist this impulse unless we want to become like just about every other church - highly regulated, controlled and lifeless.
The fact of the matter is, problems will arise in the church and in its leadership. You show me a church, and I'll show you a church that has problems. The churches planted by Paul were messed up in just about any way a church could be messed up! Even Jesus had a rogue apostle or two. When we take risks on people, we take risks on people. You don't bat 1.000. There are some strikeouts. But we must not build the entire ministry to keep from striking out. We must build the ministry so that we keep hitting the ball!
When organizations get reactionary they tend to solve an immediate problem, but create additional unforeseen difficulties in the process (which will be experienced by far more people down the road). The government has become great at this, but churches aren't too far behind. An example of reactionary governance? Our Worship Center in Burlington is applying for a Conditional Use Permit to renovate a warehouse into worship space. Simple enough, right? Not necessarily. When the building department looked at the auditorium size they were initially concerned that we could put too many people in it, especially if every one was standing (yes, I know that most people sit down in church, but I'll get to that in a minute). Where did the concern about standing room come from? A local tavern. Evidently on some Friday nights this local tavern is packed, beyond capacity, with everyone standing. Unfortunately for us, we put in our use application at the same time that the city was trying to deal with the "packed tavern problem." How are they thinking about solving it? A neighboring community solves the problem by having taverns bolt down their tables, so that they can't be pushed out of the way. So our city's recommendation to us? How about bolted-down pews! Their reasoning is if we have pews we cannot have a standing room crowd, thus eliminating the tavern concern, which has become their concern, and by extension now, our concern. Of course, we are not going to put in pews, and I think we're going to be able to negotiate this "problem," but I raise this story because this is the type of nonsensical stuff that many churches pull. And we as leaders in the church need to resist this type of creeping bureaucracy!
The past six months there has been a "pull" on me to put more regulation into the CTK story, particularly around the area of leadership qualifications. This has come from well-meaning people who have been hurt by leaders who have presented themselves to be one thing, but in actuality were another. I have personally been witness to the devastation that disingenuous leaders have caused. But this is where we want to respond and not to react. To respond means that we deal with our fallen brothers directly, and we bring them into a process of accountability and restoration. To react would mean reorganizing the entire church, or writing a policy manual, or instituting regulations, to "keep this from every happening again." Frankly, I've left heel marks behind resisting the impulse to kill a gnat with a cannon. I think we HAVE to resist this impulse unless we want to become like just about every other church - highly regulated, controlled and lifeless.
The fact of the matter is, problems will arise in the church and in its leadership. You show me a church, and I'll show you a church that has problems. The churches planted by Paul were messed up in just about any way a church could be messed up! Even Jesus had a rogue apostle or two. When we take risks on people, we take risks on people. You don't bat 1.000. There are some strikeouts. But we must not build the entire ministry to keep from striking out. We must build the ministry so that we keep hitting the ball!
Thursday, November 05, 2009
Better
I used to think that bigger was better. Over the years, the Lord has taught me just the opposite; that better is bigger. Actually, there have been three shifts in my thinking:
1. It's about church health instead of church growth. When I first start out as a pastor (22 years ago) I was enamored with "church growth." I remember asking a "successful" pastor of a large church about how his church had grown, and he told me bluntly, "Church growth principles." At the time, I did not have the experience to filter that comment. I just thought "OK" and then proceeded to buy every book I could, and attend every conference I could, on the subject of church growth. What I found is that there is a science to getting people to come to and stay in your church. Many churches have utilitized certain approaches that have resulted in increased attendance. Whether or not these people are committed to Christ and "on mission" is another question. With greater spiritual maturity I've come to appreciate church health more than church growth. Am I still interested in seeing large numbers of people come to Christ? Absolutely. I am praying for another Great Awakening. But I see this coming as the outgrowth of a vibrant, healthy, Spirit-filled church, not the result of any human efficacy.
2. It's about being the church instead of going to church. I used to see church as a place you went to. In the last several years I've come to see it as a place you go from. The real work, it has become clear to me, needs to be done in our neighborhoods, and schools, and workplaces. I get more and more excited seeing Christians engaging in ministries away from the church building, in their circle of influence. It is becoming less about how many people we can get to come, and more about how many people we can get to go.
3. It's about turning up the clarity, not the volume. Years ago I thought "If we could just find a bull horn loud enough, we could let everyone know what we know." I was a much bigger proponent, back then, of banners, crusades, billboards and mailers. All of this has its place. But there's a fine line between turning up the volume and crossing over into distortion. Nowadays I appreciate more those who have the ability to take eternal truths and make them lucid to the lost. As Jesus said, the light needs to be set on a hill, the salt needs to be salty. Instead of trying to cram truth down the throat of the culture, I think it's about sending a clearer signal, and whetting the appetite of the culture for the things of God.
1. It's about church health instead of church growth. When I first start out as a pastor (22 years ago) I was enamored with "church growth." I remember asking a "successful" pastor of a large church about how his church had grown, and he told me bluntly, "Church growth principles." At the time, I did not have the experience to filter that comment. I just thought "OK" and then proceeded to buy every book I could, and attend every conference I could, on the subject of church growth. What I found is that there is a science to getting people to come to and stay in your church. Many churches have utilitized certain approaches that have resulted in increased attendance. Whether or not these people are committed to Christ and "on mission" is another question. With greater spiritual maturity I've come to appreciate church health more than church growth. Am I still interested in seeing large numbers of people come to Christ? Absolutely. I am praying for another Great Awakening. But I see this coming as the outgrowth of a vibrant, healthy, Spirit-filled church, not the result of any human efficacy.
2. It's about being the church instead of going to church. I used to see church as a place you went to. In the last several years I've come to see it as a place you go from. The real work, it has become clear to me, needs to be done in our neighborhoods, and schools, and workplaces. I get more and more excited seeing Christians engaging in ministries away from the church building, in their circle of influence. It is becoming less about how many people we can get to come, and more about how many people we can get to go.
3. It's about turning up the clarity, not the volume. Years ago I thought "If we could just find a bull horn loud enough, we could let everyone know what we know." I was a much bigger proponent, back then, of banners, crusades, billboards and mailers. All of this has its place. But there's a fine line between turning up the volume and crossing over into distortion. Nowadays I appreciate more those who have the ability to take eternal truths and make them lucid to the lost. As Jesus said, the light needs to be set on a hill, the salt needs to be salty. Instead of trying to cram truth down the throat of the culture, I think it's about sending a clearer signal, and whetting the appetite of the culture for the things of God.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Admit
One of the hardest things for leaders to do is to own their mistakes. Humble pie is a pastry that is never tasty. But Winston Churchill said, "The price of greatness is responsibility." As leaders we are not always going to get it right. But when we get it wrong we need to know what was wrong, admit what was wrong, and remedy what was wrong. Admitting wrongdoing is a lost art that people are longing to see come into vogue. An episode of Seinfeld illustrates this beautifully. Jerry walks into a dry cleaners with a shirt that has obviously been shrunken:
Dry Cleaner: May I help you?
Jerry: Yeah, I picked up this shirt here yesterday. It's completely shrunk. There's absolutely no way I can wear it.
Dry Cleaner: When did you bring it in?
Jerry: What's the difference? Look at it! Do you see the size of this shirt?!
Dry Cleaner: You got a receipt?
Jerry: I can't find the receipt.
Dry Cleaner: You should get the receipt.
Jerry: Look, forget about the receipt, all right? Even if I had the receipt - look at it! It's a hand puppet. What am I going to do with this?!
Dry Cleaner: Yes, but how do I know we did the shirt?
Jerry: What do you think, this is a little scam I have? I take this tiny shirt all over the city conning dry cleaners out of money?! In fact, forget the money. I don't even want the money. Just once, I would like to hear a dry cleaner admit that something was their fault. That's what I want. I want an admission of guilt.
Dry Cleaner: Maybe you asked for it to be washed?
Jerry: No...Dry cleaned.
Dry Cleaner: Let me explain to you something. Okay? With certain types of fabrics, different chemicals can react, causing...
Jerry: (Interruping) You shrunk it! You know you shrunk it! Just tell me that you shrunk it!
Dry Cleaner: I shrunk it.
See, that wasn't hard, was it? Wrong. There is a line that is just short of taking full, clear responsibility, and many, many people, for whatever reason, can't get across that line. They try to minimize, defer, explain - do everything but admit that they were wrong. Meanwhile the angst only grows for those who desperately need to hear the eight words: "I'm sorry. I was wrong. Please forgive me."
I have been watching with peculiar interest the board of our local school district (where my son goes to school). The school board has been caught in a land boondoggle, purchasing property at too high a price, in an area not zoned for a school, with money that the district did not, and does not, have. It is a perfect storm of mistakes: a runaway superintendent, an incompetent appraiser, turncoat politicians, a lagging economy, a contract that was not carefully reviewed (in fact, the contract for the land cannot even be located). Now the board will be asking the community to pass a bail-out bond to help pay for the unusable land, and to keep the State from taking over the district in the next year to keep it from insolvency. (Cue Southwest Airlines' ad, "Want to get away?"). I personally think that the community might actually be inclined to bail the school district out, but I doubt it will happen unless the school board is willing to own their mistakes and take responsibility. A little bit of ownership for the mistakes would be like a paper towel on a spill. Instead, the board spread the mess around by sending out a four paragraph "message" to the community, and I quote:
"All school boards have an assortment of governance responsibilities and often face considerable challenges carrying them out..."
"(the purchase was) made after considerable evaluation..."
"the board was convinced at that time the acquisition of that property was in the best interest of the district..."
"we are committed to focusing on the future..."
"we are confident that together we will develop a plan..."
Do you notice something missing here? Yup. The closest the board got to saying, "We blew it" was use of the word "regrettable" (which still cloaks them in the role of victims, instead of protagonists).
I bring this episode to your attention, not because of the mistakes that were made in purchasing the property. I personally believe that mistakes WILL be made by leaders, and sometimes the mistakes will be quite significant. I bring this episode to your attention because of the lack of ownership for the mistake, which is a second mistake, that now puts salt in the wound. Wouldn't the school board be better served by saying, "Dear Community, We blew it. We meant well, but we kicked the can. We should have read the contract. We should have verified the information. We were the board. We were and are responsible. We didn't handle our responsibilities well and we're sorry that our mistakes have put the community in a bind." I think that might work. But truly one of the hardest things for politicians to do is ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY. The response of the board on this reminds me of Arthur Fonzerelli ("The Fonz") of Happy Days struggling to say he was “w-r-rr....w-rr-rrrr....w-rr-rrr---rrrrong.” The Fonz was cool in so many ways, but his inability to admit wrongdoing was not cool.
I have admired Bill Hybels (founder of Willow Creek Community Church) for years. But my respect went to an all-time high when he recently admitted that their attempts at spiritual formation had largely failed. Listen to this, and learn to be a leader who takes responsibility: "Some of the stuff that we have put millions of dollars into thinking it would really help our people grow and develop spiritually, when the data actually came back it wasn’t helping people that much. Other things that we didn’t put that much money into and didn’t put much staff against is stuff our people are crying out for. We made a mistake. What we should have done when people crossed the line of faith and become Christians, we should have started telling people and teaching people that they have to take responsibility to become ‘self feeders.’ We should have gotten people, taught people, how to read their bible between services, how to do the spiritual practices much more aggressively on their own."
Wow. I know where Seinfeld would like to go to church!
Dry Cleaner: May I help you?
Jerry: Yeah, I picked up this shirt here yesterday. It's completely shrunk. There's absolutely no way I can wear it.
Dry Cleaner: When did you bring it in?
Jerry: What's the difference? Look at it! Do you see the size of this shirt?!
Dry Cleaner: You got a receipt?
Jerry: I can't find the receipt.
Dry Cleaner: You should get the receipt.
Jerry: Look, forget about the receipt, all right? Even if I had the receipt - look at it! It's a hand puppet. What am I going to do with this?!
Dry Cleaner: Yes, but how do I know we did the shirt?
Jerry: What do you think, this is a little scam I have? I take this tiny shirt all over the city conning dry cleaners out of money?! In fact, forget the money. I don't even want the money. Just once, I would like to hear a dry cleaner admit that something was their fault. That's what I want. I want an admission of guilt.
Dry Cleaner: Maybe you asked for it to be washed?
Jerry: No...Dry cleaned.
Dry Cleaner: Let me explain to you something. Okay? With certain types of fabrics, different chemicals can react, causing...
Jerry: (Interruping) You shrunk it! You know you shrunk it! Just tell me that you shrunk it!
Dry Cleaner: I shrunk it.
See, that wasn't hard, was it? Wrong. There is a line that is just short of taking full, clear responsibility, and many, many people, for whatever reason, can't get across that line. They try to minimize, defer, explain - do everything but admit that they were wrong. Meanwhile the angst only grows for those who desperately need to hear the eight words: "I'm sorry. I was wrong. Please forgive me."
I have been watching with peculiar interest the board of our local school district (where my son goes to school). The school board has been caught in a land boondoggle, purchasing property at too high a price, in an area not zoned for a school, with money that the district did not, and does not, have. It is a perfect storm of mistakes: a runaway superintendent, an incompetent appraiser, turncoat politicians, a lagging economy, a contract that was not carefully reviewed (in fact, the contract for the land cannot even be located). Now the board will be asking the community to pass a bail-out bond to help pay for the unusable land, and to keep the State from taking over the district in the next year to keep it from insolvency. (Cue Southwest Airlines' ad, "Want to get away?"). I personally think that the community might actually be inclined to bail the school district out, but I doubt it will happen unless the school board is willing to own their mistakes and take responsibility. A little bit of ownership for the mistakes would be like a paper towel on a spill. Instead, the board spread the mess around by sending out a four paragraph "message" to the community, and I quote:
"All school boards have an assortment of governance responsibilities and often face considerable challenges carrying them out..."
"(the purchase was) made after considerable evaluation..."
"the board was convinced at that time the acquisition of that property was in the best interest of the district..."
"we are committed to focusing on the future..."
"we are confident that together we will develop a plan..."
Do you notice something missing here? Yup. The closest the board got to saying, "We blew it" was use of the word "regrettable" (which still cloaks them in the role of victims, instead of protagonists).
I bring this episode to your attention, not because of the mistakes that were made in purchasing the property. I personally believe that mistakes WILL be made by leaders, and sometimes the mistakes will be quite significant. I bring this episode to your attention because of the lack of ownership for the mistake, which is a second mistake, that now puts salt in the wound. Wouldn't the school board be better served by saying, "Dear Community, We blew it. We meant well, but we kicked the can. We should have read the contract. We should have verified the information. We were the board. We were and are responsible. We didn't handle our responsibilities well and we're sorry that our mistakes have put the community in a bind." I think that might work. But truly one of the hardest things for politicians to do is ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY. The response of the board on this reminds me of Arthur Fonzerelli ("The Fonz") of Happy Days struggling to say he was “w-r-rr....w-rr-rrrr....w-rr-rrr---rrrrong.” The Fonz was cool in so many ways, but his inability to admit wrongdoing was not cool.
I have admired Bill Hybels (founder of Willow Creek Community Church) for years. But my respect went to an all-time high when he recently admitted that their attempts at spiritual formation had largely failed. Listen to this, and learn to be a leader who takes responsibility: "Some of the stuff that we have put millions of dollars into thinking it would really help our people grow and develop spiritually, when the data actually came back it wasn’t helping people that much. Other things that we didn’t put that much money into and didn’t put much staff against is stuff our people are crying out for. We made a mistake. What we should have done when people crossed the line of faith and become Christians, we should have started telling people and teaching people that they have to take responsibility to become ‘self feeders.’ We should have gotten people, taught people, how to read their bible between services, how to do the spiritual practices much more aggressively on their own."
Wow. I know where Seinfeld would like to go to church!
Monday, October 19, 2009
Loyal
There's something to be said for loyalty. I haven't said much about it because I've enjoyed so much of it over the course of my ministry career that I've probably taken it for granted. But if you follow Christ, you will get to experience what he experienced, and that includes knowing what betrayal feels like. You will be initiated into the "fellowship of Christ's sufferings." You will get to understand why Jesus kept asking Peter, "Do you love me?" (John 21:15-17). You will relate to Jesus asking the twelve, "You don't want to leave too, do you?" (John 6:67). You will get why Paul bemoaned the fact that Demas had deserted him (2 Timothy 4:10). You will have to wipe a traitor's kiss off your cheek (Matthew 26:49). Jesus would be the first to tell you it's hard to build a movement out of people who are fickle, finicky and flighty, but Jesus also warned that fickle, finicky and flighty are what we'll get to work with.
I find loyalty hard to talk about because there is such a narrow path between cavernous extremes. On the one side I am sensitive to the many abuses of loyalty that have been seen in Christian circles, where the domineering pastor or Christian leader has everyone running scared. He keeps everyone silent through grand proclamations of authority and submission. The sheep meekly stumble along. But that is not actually loyal behavior. It's cultish behavior (loyalty is for the overall good; cultishness is only good for the leader). On the other side, there is a drop-off into gluelessness (not cluelessness, although probably that too). People come and go randomly. No one has any idea who is going to show up. No one stands by their word. No one trusts anyone. No one has the other person's back. I'm not sure which is worse. Too much loyalty or too little of it.
I'm still learning on this subject, but here's what I've discovered so far about how to engender a healthy loyalty, and process disloyalty when it occurs.
1. Another word for loyalty is team. Loyal people are team players. They think constantly, "How do we win together?" Individualism, on the other hand, is at the heart of disloyalty. A disloyal person is unwilling to put others' interests above their own. Their personal agenda ends up trumping all others, and eventually, when they don't get what they want, they leave and take their toys with them.
2. In a Christian context loyalty must be aligned with Christ. Paul said, "Follow me inasmuch as I follow Christ." If a leader is not following Christ, then all bets of loyalty are off (this is not Enron, here). We are only signing up to follow someone, because they are following Someone. But provided that our leaders are pointed in the right direction (toward Christ) then loyalty is godly and good.
3. Good followership is as important as good leadership. Just as there can be bad leaders, there can also be bad followers. Bad followers have a tendency to blame leaders for their lack of loyalty. Bad leaders tend to blame followers for their lack of leadership. The only way out of this death spiral is for everyone to over-own their own stuff; leaders need to step up their leadership, and followers must step up their loyalty.
4. Loyalty can thrive in a context of disagreement. For us to be loyal to each other, we do not necessarily have to agree with each other on every point. In fact, until there is disagreement, you will not be able to tell whether or not someone is loyal or just following along because it's going their way. Christian unity is embracing diversity within the will of God. It is an awesome thing to be on a team where people don't have to necessarily agree on every point, but when they leave the room they are 100% united in their direction and efforts.
5. The closer people are to the center, the more loyalty cannot just be encouraged but demanded. Not all disloyalty is created equal. Cracks at the edge can be cosmetically concealed. Fissures at the center threaten the very existence of the organization (can you imagine if the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were not united?). Because of this, a pastor-friend of mine who is intent on this point tells staff when they are hired, "Disloyalty will get you fired." Some might see this as a self-serving threat. He views this as a protective measure against the Enemy.
6. When you are betrayed, keep in mind the bigger picture. A very small percentage of people are truly disloyal. In Jesus' case the ratio was one in twelve. The pain of such behavior can be so intense, however, that it can cause you to lose sight of the faithfulness of the majority. Going back to the garden of Eden, it has been one of Satan's strategies to get us focused on what we don't have and think we need, and get our eyes off of the abundant blessings we already have. Don't fall for this! Recognize and rejoice in the majority of folks who keep their commitments.
7. Talk is cheap...and a red flag. The more of it you hear, the more skeptical you should be. Peter was vociferous in his declarations that he would never deny Christ. Jesus smelled a rat. Even Judas tried to play off his traitorous ways at the Lord's Supper. Maybe this is why James (Jesus' half-brother) said, "Don't tell us, show us." I believe you will find that the most loyal people will not be the ones promising to be. They will be the ones who keep their eyes on the Lord and week after week show up and carry out their ministry with a smile on their face, and joy in their heart.
I find loyalty hard to talk about because there is such a narrow path between cavernous extremes. On the one side I am sensitive to the many abuses of loyalty that have been seen in Christian circles, where the domineering pastor or Christian leader has everyone running scared. He keeps everyone silent through grand proclamations of authority and submission. The sheep meekly stumble along. But that is not actually loyal behavior. It's cultish behavior (loyalty is for the overall good; cultishness is only good for the leader). On the other side, there is a drop-off into gluelessness (not cluelessness, although probably that too). People come and go randomly. No one has any idea who is going to show up. No one stands by their word. No one trusts anyone. No one has the other person's back. I'm not sure which is worse. Too much loyalty or too little of it.
I'm still learning on this subject, but here's what I've discovered so far about how to engender a healthy loyalty, and process disloyalty when it occurs.
1. Another word for loyalty is team. Loyal people are team players. They think constantly, "How do we win together?" Individualism, on the other hand, is at the heart of disloyalty. A disloyal person is unwilling to put others' interests above their own. Their personal agenda ends up trumping all others, and eventually, when they don't get what they want, they leave and take their toys with them.
2. In a Christian context loyalty must be aligned with Christ. Paul said, "Follow me inasmuch as I follow Christ." If a leader is not following Christ, then all bets of loyalty are off (this is not Enron, here). We are only signing up to follow someone, because they are following Someone. But provided that our leaders are pointed in the right direction (toward Christ) then loyalty is godly and good.
3. Good followership is as important as good leadership. Just as there can be bad leaders, there can also be bad followers. Bad followers have a tendency to blame leaders for their lack of loyalty. Bad leaders tend to blame followers for their lack of leadership. The only way out of this death spiral is for everyone to over-own their own stuff; leaders need to step up their leadership, and followers must step up their loyalty.
4. Loyalty can thrive in a context of disagreement. For us to be loyal to each other, we do not necessarily have to agree with each other on every point. In fact, until there is disagreement, you will not be able to tell whether or not someone is loyal or just following along because it's going their way. Christian unity is embracing diversity within the will of God. It is an awesome thing to be on a team where people don't have to necessarily agree on every point, but when they leave the room they are 100% united in their direction and efforts.
5. The closer people are to the center, the more loyalty cannot just be encouraged but demanded. Not all disloyalty is created equal. Cracks at the edge can be cosmetically concealed. Fissures at the center threaten the very existence of the organization (can you imagine if the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were not united?). Because of this, a pastor-friend of mine who is intent on this point tells staff when they are hired, "Disloyalty will get you fired." Some might see this as a self-serving threat. He views this as a protective measure against the Enemy.
6. When you are betrayed, keep in mind the bigger picture. A very small percentage of people are truly disloyal. In Jesus' case the ratio was one in twelve. The pain of such behavior can be so intense, however, that it can cause you to lose sight of the faithfulness of the majority. Going back to the garden of Eden, it has been one of Satan's strategies to get us focused on what we don't have and think we need, and get our eyes off of the abundant blessings we already have. Don't fall for this! Recognize and rejoice in the majority of folks who keep their commitments.
7. Talk is cheap...and a red flag. The more of it you hear, the more skeptical you should be. Peter was vociferous in his declarations that he would never deny Christ. Jesus smelled a rat. Even Judas tried to play off his traitorous ways at the Lord's Supper. Maybe this is why James (Jesus' half-brother) said, "Don't tell us, show us." I believe you will find that the most loyal people will not be the ones promising to be. They will be the ones who keep their eyes on the Lord and week after week show up and carry out their ministry with a smile on their face, and joy in their heart.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Initiative
The easiest thing is to react. The second easiest thing is to respond. The hardest thing is to initiate. But CTK has become a phenomenal story because many people do the hardest thing and initiate ministry, in ways big and small. One of our values at CTK is empowerment. Empowerment, turned inside out, is initiative. I was struck recently by a story told in The Power of Small; Why Little Things Make All the Difference:
"When Linda first decided to open The Kaplan Thaler Group, she had once piece of Clairol's hair care business - Herbal Essences Shampoo, which she naively thought she could run from her Manhattan brownstone. Steve Sadove, her sole client and then-president of Clairol, tactfully suggested that Linda would at least need a business partner, since her expertise was in the creative side of advertising. Considering she had never run a company, or earned a business degree, Linda reluctantly agreed. Flipping through her Rolodex, she went on a frenzied search for the perfect partner. She wanted someone brilliant, assertive, collaborative, and challenging. The last person she was looking for was a 'yes' woman. She instinctively knew she needed someone with the moxie to tell her if the work was veering off track, or if her genius campaign idea would send a client's company into Chapter 11. She needed to hire an alter ego.
"After watching Linda eliminate more prospects than an American Idol audition, Steve stepped in again. He urged Linda to contact Robin Koval, who handled a number of other Clairol accounts at a large New York ad agency. Linda arranged to meet Robin at Michael's Muffins, a neighborhood coffee shop whose Formica decor was, to put it kindly, a far cry from the power-breakfast venues where Madison Avenue movers and shakers usually ordered their egg whites. Robin was intrigued. As fate would have it, she was also a tad hungry.
"When Linda walked in, there sat Robin at one of the wobbly tables with a giant bran muffin in front of her. The muffin had been perfectly sliced in two. She promptly introduced herself: 'Hi, I'm Robin Koval. It's great to meet you. I ordered a bran muffin, and it was huge, so I though we might share it. Of course, if you want your own muffin, or a different kind, I'll just save this for later.'
"It was business-partner love at first bite. Linda realized that this simple gesture revealed more about Robin than a resume or references could. She had shown herself to be proactive, frugal, collaborative and willing to take the initiative, even if the task was ordering breakfast. Within an hour, a partnership was taking root."
Those two ladies have gone on to create a powerhouse ad agency (they created the Aflac duck, for example), but it all started with a bran muffin, and a little bit of initiative.
Like never before, real people, average people, can take initiative. Seth Godin writes in Tribes, "In the old model things happened to you at work. Factories opened, people were hired. Bosses gave instructions. You got transferred. There were layoffs. You got promoted. Factories closed. Leaders, on the other hand, don't have things happen to them. They do things."
It used to be that people in the church waited for instructions from the pastor. In today's world, the ministry happens when and where people take initiative.
"When Linda first decided to open The Kaplan Thaler Group, she had once piece of Clairol's hair care business - Herbal Essences Shampoo, which she naively thought she could run from her Manhattan brownstone. Steve Sadove, her sole client and then-president of Clairol, tactfully suggested that Linda would at least need a business partner, since her expertise was in the creative side of advertising. Considering she had never run a company, or earned a business degree, Linda reluctantly agreed. Flipping through her Rolodex, she went on a frenzied search for the perfect partner. She wanted someone brilliant, assertive, collaborative, and challenging. The last person she was looking for was a 'yes' woman. She instinctively knew she needed someone with the moxie to tell her if the work was veering off track, or if her genius campaign idea would send a client's company into Chapter 11. She needed to hire an alter ego.
"After watching Linda eliminate more prospects than an American Idol audition, Steve stepped in again. He urged Linda to contact Robin Koval, who handled a number of other Clairol accounts at a large New York ad agency. Linda arranged to meet Robin at Michael's Muffins, a neighborhood coffee shop whose Formica decor was, to put it kindly, a far cry from the power-breakfast venues where Madison Avenue movers and shakers usually ordered their egg whites. Robin was intrigued. As fate would have it, she was also a tad hungry.
"When Linda walked in, there sat Robin at one of the wobbly tables with a giant bran muffin in front of her. The muffin had been perfectly sliced in two. She promptly introduced herself: 'Hi, I'm Robin Koval. It's great to meet you. I ordered a bran muffin, and it was huge, so I though we might share it. Of course, if you want your own muffin, or a different kind, I'll just save this for later.'
"It was business-partner love at first bite. Linda realized that this simple gesture revealed more about Robin than a resume or references could. She had shown herself to be proactive, frugal, collaborative and willing to take the initiative, even if the task was ordering breakfast. Within an hour, a partnership was taking root."
Those two ladies have gone on to create a powerhouse ad agency (they created the Aflac duck, for example), but it all started with a bran muffin, and a little bit of initiative.
Like never before, real people, average people, can take initiative. Seth Godin writes in Tribes, "In the old model things happened to you at work. Factories opened, people were hired. Bosses gave instructions. You got transferred. There were layoffs. You got promoted. Factories closed. Leaders, on the other hand, don't have things happen to them. They do things."
It used to be that people in the church waited for instructions from the pastor. In today's world, the ministry happens when and where people take initiative.
Sunday, October 04, 2009
Credit
Concerns about credit have stymied many great works of God. Ralph Waldo Emerson stated, “There is no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who gets the credit.”
We cannot become an organic movement of ministers and ministries "here, there and everywhere" if we are overly concerned about who will get the credit. In fact, I believe that one of the subliminal reasons why church leaders resist the notion of organic ministry is that they intuitively know that they will not be able to take credit for it when it happens. Let me explain, using the illustration of a woman's desire to reach out to elementary-aged girls.
A mom, seeing the challenges that confront young ladies, and feeling a call from God, desires to have a ministry to girls who are the age of her daughter. She discusses this idea with her pastor, looking for coaching and support. Two ideas come up in the conversation: a) that she could start an after-school group in her home, and invite her daughter's friends to come over after school, or b) that she could join the Sunday School as a teacher in that age group. As the conversation unfolds, lurking in the back of the pastor's mind is the desire for credit. If this mom starts a group at her home, will he be able to take credit for it? The answer is, "Not as easily as if she is working in our Sunday School." Will he let this gremlin manipulate the conversation? If so, he will say to this ministry-mom, "I think the best thing for you to do is to plug into our Sunday School."
If you are concerned about credit you will have a preference for ministries that you can see, because ministries that you can see are ones that you can control, and for which you can take credit. This is not empowerment in the truest sense, it is manipulation for the sake of the pastor's ego.
Organic church leader Tony Dale has a slogan that he tries to live by: "No empire building, no control, and no glory." He is careful to build His kingdom, instead of his own. In Isaiah 42:8 God says this: I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another." Dale writes, "For humans, the temptation to take just a little bit of the credit is very strong! But it is an incredible privilege to be a part of a move of God, and we need to remember this and stay humble."
We cannot become an organic movement of ministers and ministries "here, there and everywhere" if we are overly concerned about who will get the credit. In fact, I believe that one of the subliminal reasons why church leaders resist the notion of organic ministry is that they intuitively know that they will not be able to take credit for it when it happens. Let me explain, using the illustration of a woman's desire to reach out to elementary-aged girls.
A mom, seeing the challenges that confront young ladies, and feeling a call from God, desires to have a ministry to girls who are the age of her daughter. She discusses this idea with her pastor, looking for coaching and support. Two ideas come up in the conversation: a) that she could start an after-school group in her home, and invite her daughter's friends to come over after school, or b) that she could join the Sunday School as a teacher in that age group. As the conversation unfolds, lurking in the back of the pastor's mind is the desire for credit. If this mom starts a group at her home, will he be able to take credit for it? The answer is, "Not as easily as if she is working in our Sunday School." Will he let this gremlin manipulate the conversation? If so, he will say to this ministry-mom, "I think the best thing for you to do is to plug into our Sunday School."
If you are concerned about credit you will have a preference for ministries that you can see, because ministries that you can see are ones that you can control, and for which you can take credit. This is not empowerment in the truest sense, it is manipulation for the sake of the pastor's ego.
Organic church leader Tony Dale has a slogan that he tries to live by: "No empire building, no control, and no glory." He is careful to build His kingdom, instead of his own. In Isaiah 42:8 God says this: I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another." Dale writes, "For humans, the temptation to take just a little bit of the credit is very strong! But it is an incredible privilege to be a part of a move of God, and we need to remember this and stay humble."
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Dead
There is a difference between what we experience with "woundedness and healing," and what we experience with "death and resurrection." Let me detail the differences:
Woundedness and healing...
- process is natural
- restoration is expected and gradual
- time is an ally
- treat it and work it out
- incremental turnaround
- friends can help you
- advice is called for
Death and resurrection...
- process is supernatural
- restoration is unexpected and sudden
- time is an enemy
- grieve it and let it go
- dramatic turnaround
- only God can help you
- miracle is called for
When looking at your own life, or the lives of others, it is helpful to keep in mind these distinctions. For matters of woundedness and healing, Christian counseling, a "how to" sermon series, or small group support can make a big difference. For matters of death and resurrection, there is not much that can be done, except to wait on God for a miracle. Many believers become frustrated waiting on God for healing and restoration, not understanding that the process they are going through is more likened to a resurrection from the dead. It's not that God won't be able to bring about restoration, it's that ONLY GOD will be able to do it, and He will do it in his way, and in his time, and sometimes as a complete surprise.
As I think back on the darkest period of my life, in which I left the ministry and was filled with anger and doubt, I can see that it was more than just a wounding that needed healing. It was a death. It was the death of "David, the pastor." It was the death of a vision. It was the death of life under my control. Years later God pulled me out of the miry clay and set my feet on a rock. As I look back now, I don't view my recovery as a healing, I view it as a resurrection. God sovereignly intervened in my story. As the nursery rhyme "Humpty Dumpty" says, "All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put Humpty back together again." But while the king's men can't put the pieces together again, the King can!
Many Christian leaders want to "fix" problems when they see them. We want to view broken marriages, failed ministries and personal tragedies as challenges that need our coaching. But sometimes, what we're looking at cannot be solved with salve. It's deeper than that. There is nothing that we are going to be able to say or do to bring restoration. God is going to have to resurrect the story from the dead. At these times, we're better off to function more like the mortician than the physician. Issue the death certificate. Let them know that the marriage is dead. Let them know that their life, as they've known it, is over. Eulogize. Help them throw the dirt on the coffin. But here is the beautiful thing about the kingdom of God. Just when we think it's over, it's not. God loves to raise the dead.
Woundedness and healing...
- process is natural
- restoration is expected and gradual
- time is an ally
- treat it and work it out
- incremental turnaround
- friends can help you
- advice is called for
Death and resurrection...
- process is supernatural
- restoration is unexpected and sudden
- time is an enemy
- grieve it and let it go
- dramatic turnaround
- only God can help you
- miracle is called for
When looking at your own life, or the lives of others, it is helpful to keep in mind these distinctions. For matters of woundedness and healing, Christian counseling, a "how to" sermon series, or small group support can make a big difference. For matters of death and resurrection, there is not much that can be done, except to wait on God for a miracle. Many believers become frustrated waiting on God for healing and restoration, not understanding that the process they are going through is more likened to a resurrection from the dead. It's not that God won't be able to bring about restoration, it's that ONLY GOD will be able to do it, and He will do it in his way, and in his time, and sometimes as a complete surprise.
As I think back on the darkest period of my life, in which I left the ministry and was filled with anger and doubt, I can see that it was more than just a wounding that needed healing. It was a death. It was the death of "David, the pastor." It was the death of a vision. It was the death of life under my control. Years later God pulled me out of the miry clay and set my feet on a rock. As I look back now, I don't view my recovery as a healing, I view it as a resurrection. God sovereignly intervened in my story. As the nursery rhyme "Humpty Dumpty" says, "All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put Humpty back together again." But while the king's men can't put the pieces together again, the King can!
Many Christian leaders want to "fix" problems when they see them. We want to view broken marriages, failed ministries and personal tragedies as challenges that need our coaching. But sometimes, what we're looking at cannot be solved with salve. It's deeper than that. There is nothing that we are going to be able to say or do to bring restoration. God is going to have to resurrect the story from the dead. At these times, we're better off to function more like the mortician than the physician. Issue the death certificate. Let them know that the marriage is dead. Let them know that their life, as they've known it, is over. Eulogize. Help them throw the dirt on the coffin. But here is the beautiful thing about the kingdom of God. Just when we think it's over, it's not. God loves to raise the dead.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Style
We need to extend grace in matters of style, as well as sin. I would say that CTK has become noted for being a place of grace for sinners. We say without reservation that there is "Always a Place for You." We don't care where you've been, or what you've done, we know that love covers over a multitude of sins. We say, "God will take you where you are, He just won't leave you there." We believe there is forgiveness for the past, and hope for the future. There is no question about how we feel about sinners. We love them. The question is, "Will we extend the same kind of grace to someone who differs from us in their style?"
Thomas Jefferson put it so well when he said, "In matters of style, swim with the current, in matters of principle, stand like a rock." This has proved to be a difficult balance for Christians to maintain. We have tended to a) gravitate to certain styles (in preaching, worship, service order), then b) imagine that our preferred methodology must be "right," then c) become cynical, critical or judgmental of others for being different. We must resist this temptation. As Jefferson noted, style is an area where we want to see diversity, not unity. We want to be loyal to the master and mission, not the method and manner.
I have found that many believers have a wrong notion about Christian unity. They confuse unity with uniformity. Christian unity is not uniformity. Uniformity is the natural man's way of seeking unity and involves:
(1) looking for little things he has in common with others, then
(2) finding differences between his group and others, and finally
(3) increasingly insisting that those who are with him be like him.
That is not Christian unity. That is worldly uniformity. And, frankly, anyone can do it, which is why everyone is doing it. Christian unity is embracing diversity within the will of God (see 1 Corinthians 12). Did you catch the difference? Christian unity actually embraces diversity. Within God's will, there is grace for differences in personality and presentation.
Can you appreciate a sermon that is preached in a different style than you prefer? Can you worship with a song that isn't your favorite? Can you "talk up" a denomination that isn't yours? If not, you may need to take some of the grace that you have for sin, and apply some of it to style.
Thomas Jefferson put it so well when he said, "In matters of style, swim with the current, in matters of principle, stand like a rock." This has proved to be a difficult balance for Christians to maintain. We have tended to a) gravitate to certain styles (in preaching, worship, service order), then b) imagine that our preferred methodology must be "right," then c) become cynical, critical or judgmental of others for being different. We must resist this temptation. As Jefferson noted, style is an area where we want to see diversity, not unity. We want to be loyal to the master and mission, not the method and manner.
I have found that many believers have a wrong notion about Christian unity. They confuse unity with uniformity. Christian unity is not uniformity. Uniformity is the natural man's way of seeking unity and involves:
(1) looking for little things he has in common with others, then
(2) finding differences between his group and others, and finally
(3) increasingly insisting that those who are with him be like him.
That is not Christian unity. That is worldly uniformity. And, frankly, anyone can do it, which is why everyone is doing it. Christian unity is embracing diversity within the will of God (see 1 Corinthians 12). Did you catch the difference? Christian unity actually embraces diversity. Within God's will, there is grace for differences in personality and presentation.
Can you appreciate a sermon that is preached in a different style than you prefer? Can you worship with a song that isn't your favorite? Can you "talk up" a denomination that isn't yours? If not, you may need to take some of the grace that you have for sin, and apply some of it to style.
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
Multi-Site Church Road Trip
Greg Ligon, co-author of Multi-Site Church Road Trip (which features a chapter about CTK) asked some follow up questions of me as part of a "blog tour" that includes a stop here today (Thursday, September 10th, 2009). (See www.multisitechurchroadtrip.com). Here are the questions and my answers....
1. Dave, you say in Multi-site Church Road Trip that you and the team at Christ the King have 120 campuses and many of those are actually International campuses. What does an international campus look like? How is the same/different from one of your state-side campuses?
Overseas our gatherings are often not in an owned or leased facilities. Some of our congregations meet in tents, or under trees, or town squares. Often the gatherings have children present, whereas in the US we offer children's programming simultaneous the worship service. In the US our services are typically an hour or less. Overseas, our services are often longer than two hours. In some cultures the leader has a more prominent role that we tend to see in the US.
2. I think it is interesting that you have a commitment to international campuses and a high value for use of technology in developing leaders but no Internet campuses? Any reason for that?
Our international reach is more of a "God-thing" than anything else. We had no plan to be outside of our own county, much less around the world. But once you define the church by relationship, instead of geography, you realize that relationships do not respect geographical boundaries. We say that we can go as far as relationships will take us. Our goal is to raise up people to do ministry, so we view technology as a tool, not a strategy.
3. We have talked recently about your discovery that there is a greater access to cell coverage than high speed internet in India and many of the countries you are serving in Africa and that this has prompted you to redesign your leadership development training to be delivered in text size messages. Can you give us an update on where you are in that process? What is working? What is not?
I send out a weekly email that gets resent as text by our international leaders. Some of our leaders follow me on Twitter as well. The cell phone is clearly the next laptop. More SMS texts are sent every day in the world than email messages. We are attempting to take our "teachable points of view" and distill them to 140 characters or less. We are also developing 60-second sermons that can be utilized on cell phones.
4. You are the author of Deliberate Simplicity, another title in the Leadership Network Innovation Series. How do the key principles of simplicity find application in the establishment and execution of International Campuses?
Simplicity resonates in the two-thirds world, because it really is the only option. There are not resources available in much of the world to support the attractional model.
5. What is new about the multi-site ministry at Christ the King since we last talked?
I believe that God is showing us some new things about worship. Many of our leaders are feeling that our corporate worship has been too much about us, and not enough about Him. We are also exploring more non-musical forms of worship that have great potential to reduce our dependence on musicians as key to expanding the church.
6. What have I not asked that I should have?
You ask great questions. One additional one might be, "What complicates overseas ministry?" The answer would be: money. There is such a huge resource disparity between our church in the US and our church in the two-thirds world that we are wrestling constantly with how much to support needs overseas. So far we have sent very nominal and sporadic support, and have placed an emphasis on being self-sustaining. But it is often difficult to say "no" when they need it and we have it.
Next stop? Robert Emmitt, Senior Pastor, Community Bible Church, San Antonio, Texas - communitybible.com
To get the latest updates be sure to sign up for the RSS feed at www.multisitechurchroadtrip.com
1. Dave, you say in Multi-site Church Road Trip that you and the team at Christ the King have 120 campuses and many of those are actually International campuses. What does an international campus look like? How is the same/different from one of your state-side campuses?
Overseas our gatherings are often not in an owned or leased facilities. Some of our congregations meet in tents, or under trees, or town squares. Often the gatherings have children present, whereas in the US we offer children's programming simultaneous the worship service. In the US our services are typically an hour or less. Overseas, our services are often longer than two hours. In some cultures the leader has a more prominent role that we tend to see in the US.
2. I think it is interesting that you have a commitment to international campuses and a high value for use of technology in developing leaders but no Internet campuses? Any reason for that?
Our international reach is more of a "God-thing" than anything else. We had no plan to be outside of our own county, much less around the world. But once you define the church by relationship, instead of geography, you realize that relationships do not respect geographical boundaries. We say that we can go as far as relationships will take us. Our goal is to raise up people to do ministry, so we view technology as a tool, not a strategy.
3. We have talked recently about your discovery that there is a greater access to cell coverage than high speed internet in India and many of the countries you are serving in Africa and that this has prompted you to redesign your leadership development training to be delivered in text size messages. Can you give us an update on where you are in that process? What is working? What is not?
I send out a weekly email that gets resent as text by our international leaders. Some of our leaders follow me on Twitter as well. The cell phone is clearly the next laptop. More SMS texts are sent every day in the world than email messages. We are attempting to take our "teachable points of view" and distill them to 140 characters or less. We are also developing 60-second sermons that can be utilized on cell phones.
4. You are the author of Deliberate Simplicity, another title in the Leadership Network Innovation Series. How do the key principles of simplicity find application in the establishment and execution of International Campuses?
Simplicity resonates in the two-thirds world, because it really is the only option. There are not resources available in much of the world to support the attractional model.
5. What is new about the multi-site ministry at Christ the King since we last talked?
I believe that God is showing us some new things about worship. Many of our leaders are feeling that our corporate worship has been too much about us, and not enough about Him. We are also exploring more non-musical forms of worship that have great potential to reduce our dependence on musicians as key to expanding the church.
6. What have I not asked that I should have?
You ask great questions. One additional one might be, "What complicates overseas ministry?" The answer would be: money. There is such a huge resource disparity between our church in the US and our church in the two-thirds world that we are wrestling constantly with how much to support needs overseas. So far we have sent very nominal and sporadic support, and have placed an emphasis on being self-sustaining. But it is often difficult to say "no" when they need it and we have it.
Next stop? Robert Emmitt, Senior Pastor, Community Bible Church, San Antonio, Texas - communitybible.com
To get the latest updates be sure to sign up for the RSS feed at www.multisitechurchroadtrip.com
Monday, September 07, 2009
Class
In the CTK story we see most small groups falling somewhere between being a Bible study, and being a social hang out. Some groups, of course, are Bible studies, and there is certainly nothing wrong with that. Other groups are purely social gatherings, and there is nothing wrong with that, either. But what we feel is "most right" for the "most people" is a group in the middle ground, that emphasizes biblical application in a social context. This type of gathering is what John Wesley called the "class."
One of the dictionary definitions for "class" is a "social group with similar opportunities." The "classes" that Wesley organized were not Bible study groups or the "sharing" groups we have come to know. They were weekly groups, led by a volunteer, in which participants gave a report to each other about their lives, their activities, their temptations, their failures, and their successes. The sharing was targeted to what it meant to be a Christ-follower. In the safety of friends, each one would be encouraged to follow after God and to do meet the needs of people in the larger community. The emphasis was on living out the Christian faith in all of life. The groups were powerful because there was an edge to the conversations - some might call it support or accountability - in every group meeting. Outsiders who would attend the meetings were struck by the spiritual authenticity and fervor. These were not ordinary people living ordinary lives. It was truly a special "class" of people.
To understand the Spirit of the "class," listen to Wesley's challenge: "Make every class meeting an exhilarating feast of divine love and holy joy and people will come no matter how tired and/or busy they are. Fire is kindled with fire and wind. Enthusiasm is kindled with enthusiasm and the Holy Spirit." Has your group become lifeless or boring? Pray for a fresh fire. Engage more deliberately. Ask daring spiritual questions. Expect transformation.
One of the dictionary definitions for "class" is a "social group with similar opportunities." The "classes" that Wesley organized were not Bible study groups or the "sharing" groups we have come to know. They were weekly groups, led by a volunteer, in which participants gave a report to each other about their lives, their activities, their temptations, their failures, and their successes. The sharing was targeted to what it meant to be a Christ-follower. In the safety of friends, each one would be encouraged to follow after God and to do meet the needs of people in the larger community. The emphasis was on living out the Christian faith in all of life. The groups were powerful because there was an edge to the conversations - some might call it support or accountability - in every group meeting. Outsiders who would attend the meetings were struck by the spiritual authenticity and fervor. These were not ordinary people living ordinary lives. It was truly a special "class" of people.
To understand the Spirit of the "class," listen to Wesley's challenge: "Make every class meeting an exhilarating feast of divine love and holy joy and people will come no matter how tired and/or busy they are. Fire is kindled with fire and wind. Enthusiasm is kindled with enthusiasm and the Holy Spirit." Has your group become lifeless or boring? Pray for a fresh fire. Engage more deliberately. Ask daring spiritual questions. Expect transformation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
