4/7InkzHVUEQeEdU9vpc1tikzEhChrKmPfvXI-FSDBrBQ

January 2015

Things Most Church Replanters Don’t Talk About

shutterstock_40469560Congregations Viewed in Black and White

I had favorite book when I was a child. It was old even when I was young— probably dating back to the 1920s or so. Something about it appealed to me. I brought it home from the library countless times. It was a book on etiquette. The rules of etiquette were taught with stories about children living in Good Habit Land and their brushes with Children from Bad Habit Land. Never the two should meet. Everything was black and white. No confusing grey areas.

 

That view of the world appealed to me as a 9-year-old. But time teaches that things aren’t always so clear.

 

This is the problem for theologians jumping on the Church Replanting bandwagon. They theorize with a similar simplistic world view. In fact, they go a step further. They attempt to create a simplistic Church with themselves in charge.

 

Church Replanters think they are creating one new Good Church. But their tactics are divisive. They are creating Good Church and Bad Church—but they call it New Church and Old Church. Old Church is inhabited by Bad Laity. New Church is inhabited by Good Laity.

Bad Laity

  • Bad Laity have been around for a while. Long enough to know church rules. Long enough to have attended Sunday School and Confirmation Class. Long enough to pick up the pieces after a few less than stellar pastorates. They are not theologians as Church Replanters will point out, but they are acquainted with the Bible. Church Replanters will stress their need for guidance to truly understand and implement biblical teachings.
  • Bad Laity are in church for the long haul. They have roots that predate them. Their Church is their heritage. They care in a very deep way. They want their children to be part of what has been important to them. Failure to succeed at this is failure indeed.
  • Bad Laity have experience. Although not trained as theologians they probably attended classes and taught many courses written by theologians. Something might have rubbed off! They know pastors aren’t perfect and that any pastor won’t do. They know that there is always more work in a congregation than one pastor can do. They’ve done a lot of it! They look for pastors that complement the laity rather than manage the laity. They look for qualities in a pastor they can trust and they know from experience will resonate with others in their community. They are suspicious of leaders who are willing to divide a congregation to make progress that is defined by one leader.
  • Bad laity have baggage. Personal baggage. Church baggage. Some problems are of their own making. Some not!

 

One approach would be to trust the teachings of the Bible and work with Bad Laity to avoid hurtful and lasting labels and to look for their strengths while treating hurts and fostering understanding, forgiveness and reconciliation. But these teachings may have been neglected for so long that they are now more difficult to apply—even for theologians who truly understand them. Best to unload the problems—for the sake of the Church, of course.

Good Laity

  • Good Laity in the eyes of Church Replanters are ideally new to Church. They are less familiar with church procedure and will accept ideas without question. Their inexperience is gold. Their trust has yet to be challenged. Some Good Laity might be replanted, following the Replanter from a previous parish. Their loyalty to the preacher is already proven. Bad Laity will be suspicious of their motives—one reason Bad Laity must go!
  • Good Laity used to be called seekers—people without a church home who are looking to satisfy spiritual yearning. They are likely to believe leaders with faith like a child’s belief in Santa. That faith must be protected from people who might let it slip that Santa does not fly through the sky and scale rooftops and chimneys. Another reason Bad Laity must go!
  • Good Laity surely have baggage. It’s part of the human condition. Baggage prompts people to look for answers in the Church. They are a clean slate for church leaders—eager to please and confident that leadership has their interests at heart.
  • Their baggage is likely to be personal—divorce, sickness, drug or alcohol abuse, employment, depression. They are not likely to have been involved in church leadership, so they won’t come with expectations.
  • Despite problems, Good Laity are lower maintenance from the Church Replanter’s point of view. They are eager, willing, and trusting. A quick ascent in the world of church will validate them. That’s all good. It helps if they are willing to part with a tithe or two! If not, they can always find help for their problems in secular programs.

The Gospel Doesn’t Take This Point of View

Jesus starts his ministry among family and friends at the wedding in Cana. Then, after he clears the temple of money seekers, he addresses the concerns of Nicodemus — an established church leader. He doesn’t lock him out! He works with him, one on one, in the dark of night. Nicodemus—despite his baggage, confusion, and doubts—sticks with Jesus to the bitter end! He provides the embalming spices for the crucified Christ.

 

Church Replanters are about appearances. They want to side-step problems to create the illusion of quick and early success. If things don’t work out — well, it isn’t the Replanter’s fault. How can anyone be expected to fix all the problems created by decades of Bad Laity?

 

Replanters are willing to bypass what Church is supposed to be about in order to create illusions of peace and harmony. There is a temptation to promote a cult of personality with little attention to what will happen when the charismatic leader moves on and the congregation is once again working with the best they can afford, but now with inexperienced lay members on their own.

 

Jesus didn’t seem to care so much about illusions of peace. He used conflict as a teaching tool. He sometimes created conflict to make his point!

 

Church replanters see the expulsion of Bad Laity as opening a level highway to success. Good Laity are expected to follow this easy road in abundance.

 

The problem: If Good Laity stick around for a few years, they are bound to become Bad Laity. The moment the Church Replanter moves on, they are left to provide leadership with little experience. When they find their own way, they will have to be kicked out to repave the road for another set of pliable Good Laity. Replanters have this covered with rhetoric — Every church has a life cycle.  It used to be hundreds of years. Now it is the span of one life—if that.

 

The search for easy success ignores the long-term challenges Church Replanters create.

 

What problems? Isn’t everything wonderful in Church Replanting Land?

 

No, the problems are likely to be growing. Replanters have swept them from the church doorstep like dry leaves — until the next breeze blows them back.

 

Church Replanters want total control of ministry. By expelling the people they have labeled as Bad Laity, they think they are creating control, but they have lost it.

 

You see, the Bad Laity that have been strategically eliminated from the Church still live in the community. They may be related to the new Good Laity in intricate ways that only the people in the neighborhood understand. They may even be their employers or leaders in community government. Their kids are likely to attend the same schools and play on the same sport teams. The Bad Laity Ladies will meet the Good Laity Ladies at the hair dresser. Just because you aren’t talking to the Bad Laity doesn’t mean there isn’t talk. This was always true, but now there is the internet. Talk about creating bad spin!

 

Expelling people from church hurts deeply. Failing to recognize that hurts deeply. Pride in this tactic hurts deeply. There may have been a time when hurt people could be easily dismissed—out of sight, out of mind. But that day is over. There will be talk. There will be social media chatter.  People will be watching and making their own decisions about who might be right in the disputes. What chance do you think the outsider has?

 

If you treat the most skilled, loyal and knowledgeable members badly, you are creating obstacles that will come back to bite you.

 

We at Redeemer have experienced these tactics. We know what to watch for.

 

Next post!

The Keys to the Modern Church

cogWho holds the keys to the Church?

I read Seth Godin’s blog—I and many, many others. One of his recurring themes is how we are emerging from an industrial society that views the populace as cogs in an industrial wheel. Our schools have approached education as preparation for being a cog in the system. He recognizes that this won’t work much longer. It is time to think differently not only about how we educate but how we view the people who share our times.

 

It is time to think differently about Church, too. Are we treating our people like cogs in the Church Wheel?

 

When the idea of Sunday School developed back in the 1800s it was directed at educating the children of industrial neighborhoods. Hmm!

 

The people we hope to reach today are living in a fast-changing world. As a group, we are better educated than any time in history. College degrees are the norm in many communities. I watched my son graduate from high school having covered most of the material presented to me in college! The best and brightest are not likely to accept being cogs in the Church or anywhere else!

 

Returning to the comfort of medieval thinking is not going to work. Changing the way people have thought for centuries is a daunting proposition.

 

How did we get where we are today?

st peterOften the early attempts at order became church law and were enveloped by doctrine but were actually born of convenience and self-interest. Early church leaders, seeking authority or some justification for systemizing Christianity, looked at the Bible and read how Jesus identified Peter as the outstanding leader among his first disciples. In earthbound thinking, and as history made such thinking convenient, all kinds of rules were attached to the “Feed my sheep” passage.

 

Oddly, male church leaders read this passage and focused on gender. Peter was male, therefore all church leaders forevermore must be male. Jesus does not mention gender as his reason for choosing Peter. Peter was also married, but married clergy were problematic in a society all too familiar with abuses of ungoing power and wealth by virtue of birth. Let’s ignore that!

 

The same logic applies to the Church’s view of Mary. Mary was a woman. Mary gave birth to Jesus. Therefore, the role of women in the Church is to bear children—something men can’t do, as a respected, high-ranking cardinal recently pointed out in a 60 Minutes interview.

 

Virgin_MMary probably did a lot more than give birth to Jesus, both before and after the Resurrection. But she did not write the Gospels, and she wasn’t a man at a time when men made most decisions. So church leaders focus on Mary as woman, while they assign themselves every other position because they cannot bear children. It doesn’t make sense today. It never made sense.

 

The Church is no longer the political power it once was. That has been good. The Church should focus on creating Godly community. But the Church must do a timely and unselfish job if it is to keep the attention of people who don’t have to participate by law or custom.

 

Lacking societal pressure, people are choosing to opt out of something that just isn’t making sense in the world we know. Younger generations, baby boomers and down, are not necessarily forsaking spirituality or Christ, we just have a sense that we don’t fit the mold that was so comfortable for our parents and grandparents.

 

Here’s a question:

If the earliest Christians had lived today, what kind of structure would they have chosen?

 

Would they have noticed Peter’s gender as the determining qualification for leadership? Would they have focused on other qualities that are equally “Peter”—his passion and loyalty, his pragmatism, his humility and repentance, his ability to recognize his short-comings, his ability to change? Would they see Mary as a dedicated and brave witness to the Crucifixion, as a leader among the many women following her son?

 

The Church might recognize that the laity are not  “cogs” in the Church Wheel, requiring nothing more than a weekly oiling. They might find that many laity hold the keys to the future Church. There are countless Peters and Marys with plenty of work to go around.

 

This was always recognized to some extent with the auxiliaries of the church, nuns and deaconesses often provided the healing, social, and teaching functions that were foundational to church growth. Our small church owes as much to diaconate leadership as we do to clergy!

 

Modern young people do not want to be “cogs.” Today’s faithful want to use their skills to the fullest without feeling secondary, under the control of people who have power but lack their expertise.

 

It’s not that this generation is anti-church. We are frustrated with the obstacles that are holding us back but over which we have little control.

 

Here’s another set of questions:

What if in the full spectrum of time WE are the earliest Christians? What if two, three, four thousand years from now, there are Christian faithful looking to us for saintly example? What examples are we setting to help them?

 

Opting out is a modern choice.

 

The Church that doesn’t recognize this and respond to the loss of the faithful will wither.

2×2 In the New Year

gossipWhat 2×2’s Ministry Is and Isn’t

It’s a new year. 2×2 spent the last few months posting less and preparing for the new year more.

 

We were surprised to find that our online ministry, sponsored by the smallest of small churches, is once again the victim of Christians who fear our influence.

 

Someone who sends support to selected ministries read our posts about small churches in far away places like Kenya and Pakistan and decided that we use our site to collect money and suggested that we are keeping contributions for ourselves.

 

THIS IS UNTRUE!

 

This person did not look very closely or direct any questions about our ministry to us. There is no DONATE button on our website. 2×2 is not set up for Paypal or Credit Card contributions. If we were interested in collecting money, we would have set these up years ago!

 

This troubled reader decided to cut support to one of these ministries because of our posts! Gossip started! We got a few emails: Where’s the money you are collecting for our orphans?

 

Pope Francis speaks about the tyranny of gossip in the Church. It spreads like wildfire and does more damage.

 

And so we start this year by telling you a bit more about 2x2virtualchurch with the hope of nipping the gossip before it buds!

 

A Correspondence Ministry

Paul’s ministry lasts because he wrote to churches.

 

We write to ministries of widows and orphans and struggling people, because we are widows and orphans and struggling people. Our correspondence is always initiated by them—when they find our website. We look for no more than Christian fellowship and mutual support, sharing our struggles and praying for one another. We find strength in recognizing that all small churches face challenges and they are often very alone in their work. We try to help—not by establishing a support system and raising money in any ongoing way and not by demanding doctrinal agreement. We don’t have the skills or manpower to get into that kind of control. We use a worldwide platform (which everyone has access to these days) to tell ministry stories—to help them.

 

Some of the people who contact us are looking for money. One sent us a detailed proposal! We are clear from the get-go that we have no money to give. Some of them disappear. A few of them continue to share. When we write about their ministries we do so with their permission. Some amazing things have happened as a result of just communicating!

 

We publicize small church ministries because they are rarely written about from a positive point of view. In our country, they are often the targets for church closures, orchestrated for the benefit of richer church bodies. Many have been neglected for years. Pastors, if they have one, are sent with instructions—just take care of them until they die a natural death.

 

Small churches play a very important role in the church. We are in a position to directly reach the marginalized and the hurting—the people most in need—the people who can’t pay comfortable salaries and send support money to regional bodies they never see. They are in the best position to serve daily—not in token outreaches at holiday time, not as badges for those who can afford charity. It doesn’t matter if they are in rural America, urban America, the African bush or the dangerous streets of the Muslim world. Small churches serve where mission is most difficult.

 

2×2 works to create voice for small church ministry.

Our Response to the Muslim Attack on Christians in Pakistan

In 2013, 2×2 responded to an extraordinary situation that was getting very little attention by bigger and richer church entities. In this one case, we offered to help people contribute to an extraordinary situation that affects all Christians but which we found no easy way within the established church to help.

 

2×2 was appalled at the church bombings in Pakistan in September 2013. A church with 250 worshipers was bombed by Muslim terrorists as the congregation was moving from worship to fellowship. Scores were killed. More injured.

 

We were close to this ministry partly because a pastor in Pakistan already had been corresponding with us for two years. When we heard about the bombings, we wrote to our contact: Are you all right?

 

He told us in detail what the national news was missing—that there had been multiple explosions and that the survivors were suffering from serious wounds and many children had been orphaned. The injured feared going to Muslim-operated hospitals. Christians had gone into hiding, fearing more attacks. Horrific!

 

How can we help? we asked. They needed clothing, food and medicine. They didn’t ask for money!

 

In the congregations we visited following the bombing, the Pakistan situation went unmentioned. When we talked with people about it, we got blank stares. We agreed with a Jewish columnist in the Philadelphia Inquirer newspaper: Where is the Christian outrage!

 

But how could we help from so far away. That’s what national church entities are supposed to be good at!

 

2×2 has Lutheran roots despite being excluded from the ELCA. We looked for a way to help within the Church. We found no “companion synod” for Pakistan. Lutheran World Relief’s website did not list Pakistan as a service area and an email to the ELCA person listed as in charge of this sort of thing went unanswered.

 

So we offered to be a conduit for anyone who might want to help. There was no fund-raising “drive.” Just a mention and promise to help if anyone was interested. A few local readers, people we know, contributed. Their contributions were handed to us—not sent through the website.

 

About $265 was received. Every penny was sent to Pakistan. This was a lot of work. It took numerous trips to the bank. Pakistan is one of three countries where wire transfers are difficult, the bank officer explained. Since we all work as volunteers, this is not something we want to do every day! 2×2 paid the wire costs.

2×2 Sparked Reader Response

A 2×2 reader in Michigan, an eight-hour drive from Philadelphia, shared our post with her daughter’s book club. The children (middle school age and representing several churches) made a project of collecting clothing to send to Pakistan. The young people sent three huge boxes of winter clothing. 2×2 paid for the shipping. 2×2 pocketed nothing.

 

The children found the project so meaningful that they are currently repeating their clothing drive. We will support it by publicizing it. We will not benefit from it. Any donations that might be received will be forwarded. Every penny.

 

We made this effort to help Pakistan because we saw no one else doing this.

 

We still wonder why there was not more outrage. We wonder why it does not occur to Christians that strengthening their witness might be the most cost-effective strategy in stopping the hate. We are not big enough to do much more than we did.

 

We are proud that we were able to help, even in these small ways. It is disturbing that any reader would interpret our mission as self-serving.

Just for the Record—What 2×2 Isn’t

2×2 operates with no property and with no paid leadership. The ELCA confiscated our property and endowment funds in 2009. There is significant prejudice and ongoing gossip about our congregation because we resisted their efforts.

 

We are determined to continue our ministry. If we fail it will be incentive for church leaders to replicate these actions in other small churches. This is a very real threat to small churches as it is remains a tempting strategy in clergy circles.

 

We have members with skills in communications and education. We launched 2x2virtualchurch website four years ago.

 

We are entirely volunteer. We don’t even take offerings at our worship services. We talked a local bank into holding what little cash we have without a monthly fee, or even that would be gone.

 

So, please, if you care about any ministry you read about on 2×2, feel free to give directly to them. We can put you in touch with the leaders of these ministries (with their permission). We consider them friends in ministry but we make no attempt to oversee their work.

 

We are just a little church that reached 50,000 new readers last year. We have no hidden agenda. We are pretty upfront about our ministry!

Future Direction—What 2×2 Will Be in 2015

We are dedicated to helping small church ministries. For the last four years, we have visited dozens of small churches and talked to countless lay leaders. We’ve come to know their special challenges. We know the frustration of finding resources for lay leaders. We know that small churches often can’t afford salaried help with specialized expertise in music, education and youth leadership—but we have the same needs!

 

Most church resources are produced by people familiar with larger churches. Most church publishers aim their sales at larger churches and their leaders. Their advertising efforts are aimed at professional leaders. Most church leaders who rise to influential positions spend very little time serving small churches. Therefore, many church resources assume ministry conditions that are increasingly rare! 

 

We believe that the laity are very important to the future of the Church.

 

We started developing resources that can be implemented by lay leaders—not to the exclusion of clergy but recognizing the realities. For example, we know small churches have difficulty maintaining traditional Sunday Schools, but still have a need to foster faith. That’s why we outline object lessons that draw in an entire congregation–not just children and that can be used in worship.

 

In 2015, 2×2 will launch resources that are useful and affordable to small congregations and that can be implemented by any dedicated leader, lay or clergy. We will continue to offer free resources. We don’t want money to stop people from using them. We intend to republish them in more convenient ways. Yes, we hope that this will help us continue our ministry long into the future. For now, it is all volunteer. We’ll find our way as we go!

 

One of the incentives that we hope will be of interest to our readers is the creation of community around the resources and the availability of “coaching” for things like website development—something we’ve pioneered! We hope to create online forums to unite the leaders of small congregations, especially lay leaders, in sharing. Our experience should be able to save other congregations time in creating and maintaining their own web ministries.

 

This is in keeping with our mission to help small church ministry. It may be a direction that doesn’t occur to church leaders who have distanced themselves from small congregations. This is the void—the niche— 2×2 tries to fill!