4/7InkzHVUEQeEdU9vpc1tikzEhChrKmPfvXI-FSDBrBQ

Rethinking Small Church Ministry

A Search for Miracles in the Church

resurrectionIn the sure and certain hope of the Resurrection

Tim Shapiro posted on the Center for Congregations’ Congregational Resource Guide blog.

 

This post is short and far from comprehensive. Even so, it manages to capture the mindset of a cloudy denominational Church vision.

 

He begins by acknowledging that congregational decline may have reached a point where failure is irreversible.

 

The “why” that quickly follows is presented as accepted. The ability to afford a full-time pastor is the primary measure of most denominational assessments for congregational viability.

 

The churches we now label “mainline” would never have become “mainline” if they had measured their prospects by the ability to afford a full-time pastor when they first started out.

 

The groundwork for New World Christianity was laid by the laity, who typically sent word to Europe when they thought they had reached a point where clergy were affordable.

 

Churches became integral parts of American society by the work of itinerant pastors who may have visited congregations only a few times a year. Laity held the fort and grew the army in between clergy visits.

 

Lutherans had H. M. Muhlenberg in the east. He served three congregations, started others and gave itinerant support to congregations from New York to Georgia. In doing so, he created the Lutheran denomination in America.

 

As populations moved west, prairie and frontier churches followed suit—sending word of their needs to eastern seminaries or writing to the Old Country for pastoral help when they could afford it.

 

That wasn’t the end of lay influence in church growth by any means. The lay-led Sunday School movement of the 19th and 20th centuries was largely responsible for congregational growth.

 

It is only in recent decades that pastors were given the status of chief executives. That role is still not part of many constitutions even as it is practiced.

 

Congregations today are expected to have a pastor in charge. This modern expectation places unbearable stress on the foundation of ministry during tough times—when people need their churches the most.

 

However lofty a congregation’s mission and vision statements, mission follows only if the congregations, 90% of which have fewer than 250 active members, can support a full-time pastor, small support staff and building. With a bare bones budget of $150,000, every man, woman and child in a congregation must give $600 per year. In truth, any congregation of 250 has only a few people contributing at that level.

 

That means there is no budget for mission. As congregations invest more in CEO-level leadership, they depend on CEO pastors to do the work. This probably works for a while. When trouble surfaces, years into decline, the power structure of the Church is not about to revert. The only plan is to get along while the money holds out. Plans revolve around making the money last. Long-term pastorates, still seen as desirable, become rare as pastors look for positions where success might be more possible.

 

Lay leadership accept submissive roles—sometimes willingly, sometimes less so. Ego wars, generally known as congregational conflict, often result. There will be a faction in most churches that see clergy holding executive authority as fitting. There will be other factions that question their value as volunteers. Can they be of greater service elsewhere? They slowly disappear, leaving an executive pastor with little support.

 

Perhaps this is irreversible—a failure of our collective faith and the message we are all commissioned to deliver. Perhaps the struggle is now so dire that it reaches beyond the congregation into the regional and national offices. Perhaps this dictates that the future of the Church is a contest to determine who is the last standing—the local churches or the denominational headquarters.

 

Shapiro closes with an observation about the pockets of hope in congregations that manage as anomalies among failures.

 

Many thriving congregations are new. They aren’t included in the researchers’ databases. Also, their stories do not fit a normative pattern of problem and then solution. The stories are personal. The stories are idiosyncratic. They are signs of God’s free Spirit. They are about new creations. They are signs of leadership courage and maturity.

 

His observation does not end there. He adds this:

 

Such exceptions often are dependent on a leader’s particular charisma and thus not replicable.

 

Ah! But it’s that charisma that big buck churches often rely upon. It’s that charisma that attracts investment and those with business savvy. And it’s that charisma that leaves a hole in communities when that leader moves on. When that happens, the laity emerge from the corners, ready to take up the cause. But denominations look down upon them. “But you can no longer afford a full-time pastor.”

 

Perhaps the situation would not be so dire, if laity never had been swept aside.

 

Shapiro ends his post with a call to action. Share the stories of churches that flourish against the odds. That’s difficult to do when church news is controlled by denominational leadership who want their own definition of success to populate the headlines. They want to tell the story of the pastor that rides in and manages a miracle.

 

But wait!

 

If we believe in our calling, if we believe our own message, we do not believe that anything within God’s control is “irreversible.” Do we? If mountains can be moved, cannot churches thrive?

 

Here are five steps necessary for a mountain-moving miracle.

 

  1. Believe.
  2. Be courageous. Or as it is written in Joshua: Be bold. Be strong. For the Lord God is with you.
  3. Be action-oriented. It is all in the often over-looked book of James. There must be action, a plan.
  4. Set realistic goals. Salaries of full-time pastors have become unrealistic priorities. They cripple congregations that can still afford the salaries but not much more. So what goals can congregations achieve with the resources they have? What stepping stones can lead congregations to new possibilities? Caretaker pastors are not the answer. Even part-time pastors must have growth goals.
  5. Enlist partners. Expecting a full-time pastor to work miracles alone is laying the groundwork for years playing the blame game. Congregations must interact with their communities—individuals, businesses, schools, and government. Start with the people in the pew. Move quickly to articulate your mission in public forums—in other words, online. Make way for miracles.

 

Remember the Resurrection!

The Horizontal Church: Part 2

Vector illustration of a wooden staircase
Why Church Size Will Mean Much Less in the Church of the Future

The Vertical Church values big. Big translates economically into more support for centralized services—one of the reasons the Church was structured vertically in the first place. It often ignores the reality that the effectiveness of church mission relies on community, which functions best on a smaller scale—and who today can do a great deal more on their own than they could twenty years ago.

 

Above is our infographic that describes congregations by size. It depicts this from the lay point of view. Clergy will be familiar with this terminology. You can find a lot written about it online from the clergy point of view. Clergy discussion usually centers on how church size translates to leadership style.

 

Less discussed is the economic significance. But it is surely on every pastor’s mind.

 

The playing field for congregations was more even when churches provided parsonages. This helped to contain one of the largest expenses in hiring professional help. It kept the leadership in the community. No commuters need apply. Almost any size church could afford significant help, sometimes by yoking with another parish or two, but often on their own.

 

Compensation packages today have put significant professional leadership out of reach for many — maybe even most congregations. Yet the small church continues to play a vital role in community—even as their status wanes.

 

Much of this disparity will disappear in the coming horizontal church. Even small churches will have wide reach once they embrace modern technology. 2×2’s mission is an example. We are about a dozen members who are reaching about 80,000 people at the first level of engagement each year. The expanding network of social media makes our greatest reach immeasurable.

 

We will face many challenges as the horizontal church emerges. Here are three.

  1. Attracting leadership that is savvy in the use of social media and willing to shift the focus of delivery of the Word from nearly empty sanctuaries to the densely populated online community.
    This requires skills many who are already in the ministry never imagined having to learn. Since seminaries today are attracting a large number of second career students, who also are new to social media, it will take a while to develop this mindset among church leaders. Congregations eager to start using social media will have to rely on lay leadership or wait—perhaps until it is too late!
  2. Creating an economic infrastructure for this type of ministry requires looking beyond the offering plate for funding.
  3. Prioritizing church resources differently. The structure of today’s church centers on church communities with property. Property is important but expensive. The horizontal church will have to find ways to make owning property economically sustainable or reconsider the value of owning property.

 

There are many other considerations, but this is enough as we start to consider the emerging horizontally structured church.

 

Here’s the big problem. As the Vertical Church begins to die (and this is already underway), leaders, steeped in tradition, will try to bolster the larger churches at the expense of the smaller churches. Haves and Have Nots. This is an economic necessity. Their survival depends on offerings that most churches cannot spare. Larger churches have more resources (at least for now). Leadership focus will be on placing their stable of clergy in churches who can support them and the hierarchy.

 

Leadership in smaller congregations (most congregations) will increasingly rely on laity who have little voice beyond their own community.

 

The shift to the horizontal church can be made peacefully,  but it is a dramatically different way of thinking. It is likely to come at a cost that will first hurt small churches but will benefit larger churches only short-term. Very short-term.

Mobile Worship: The New Church Bulletin

seismic shiftToday’s Tablets = Yesterday’s Stained Glass Windows

In medieval times, when most lowly villagers could not read, the church used art and architecture to teach. Sculpture, stained windows, and elaborate murals communicated when the words of the priest failed. It would have been less expensive and more effective for priests to speak to the congregation in the language they used to barter for eggs, but that didn’t occur to anyone for a few hundred years. (Thank you Martin Luther.)

 

For centuries, priests stood before the people, spouting doctrine in Latin, while the congregation stared out the windows, which blocked their view with biblical pictures. Advertising has always been with us.

 

Fast forward to the 21st century.

 

Most people can read. In fact, most people can read English no matter where they live. (A common language changes the world of mission, but that’s a topic for another day.)

 

Modern architecture is spartan. Windows are functional and colorful, but their messages are often little more than color and geometry. We’ve come to count on literacy.

 

Nevertheless, studies show that the written word, accompanied by visuals, is 80% more effective in communication than the written word alone.

 

What an opportunity for modern worship! Today, we can use images more effectively than ever before. But will we?

 

Some churches use projection. Some flash ads about their ministry and inspirational photos before worship. Some have the order of worship projected, lessening the need for paper bulletins. But this is only the tip of the communication iceberg.

 

Soon each worshiper will have a smartphone or graphic tablet within reach.

 

The immediate reaction from worship leaders is likely to attempt to discourage electronic devices in worship. They will argue that attention should be elsewhere — not without merit. But before we dig ourselves into a hole we can’t crawl out of with this argument, let’s look at how personal media tools could enhance worship on Sunday morning and perhaps extend the worship experience beyond the sanctuary during the week.

 

Oh yes, there is another possibility. Communication with your worshiping community using these devices can begin before Sunday morning. Imagine your congregation coming to worship already primed for the topic of the day!

 

Let’s unplug our 20th century minds for a bit. OK, now take a deep breath. Plug into the 21st century.

 

Consider this.

 

If it was acceptable for worshipers to ponder theology while gazing at elaborate windows while listening to a priest drone, how can it be wrong for worshipers to glance at an equally beautiful image on their iPad—especially images chosen or created specifically to accompany the message of the day?

 

Before you announce to your congregations, “Please turn off your cell phones,” etc., think about how these modern tools might be used in worship.

 

Quit fighting it. Give your worshipers good reasons to turn their devices on. (If you don’t, they will find their own reasons.)

 

This year, beginning with Epiphany, 2×2 started a new series of worship resources. We hope to create weekly slide presentations that can complement the lectionary lessons of the day. We started with the Baptism of Our Lord. The second presentation is Jesus, Lamb of God and this week’s presentation is Jesus Calls His First Disciples.  The presentations reference each of the four lectionary readings. They include about a dozen images. They are completely editable. They can be uploaded to your parish website. They can be shared.

 

In addition, we have a presentation designed to guide discussion on mission statements.

 

Separate images can be used separately on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, or Pinterest. They can be shared.

 

A pastor might refer to them while preaching. They can be used for discussion groups.

 

In the first two weeks these first presentations have already been viewed online about 600 times.

 

It’s a new concept, a new tool.

 

Here’s why it is worth a try.

 

The sermon is a major expense for every congregation. This expensive message is delivered to fewer people. The expense stays the same or grows while the impact wanes. This should be a concern to every congregation.

 

The few people who attend church today live in a world in which more sensory engagement is expected. The sermon, as presented today, is going to become an increasingly archaic form of communication.

 

No wishing it weren’t so is going to change this. It’s a cultural shift. Tomorrow’s worshipers will come to church (we hope) with different expectations.

 

Today’s students do not sit in classrooms with neat rows of desks and chairs facing the front of the room. They sit in a circles with all engaged in conversation. There is less solitary homework and more group projects and hands-on learning. Worship as we know it is going to seem alien to them, especially if their parents did not bring them to church as they were growing up.

 

From the relative absence of people under 40 in worship, this is already a reality.

 

Try something new. Open your sanctuary to the world.

 

Start with this series and then create your own. Involve your members. Students are using Powerpoint in school. They’ll know what to do!

 

Here’s our current library:

Baptism of Our Lord

Jesus, Lamb of God

Jesus Calls His First Disciples

________

photo credit: gdsteam via photopin cc

 

The Wikicclesia Church: Open Source Religion

2x2painting

 The Open Source Church: Our Future

This week’s Alban Institute blog post is written by Landon Whitsitt.

 

He opens:

At some level, the notion of a “Wikipedia church” —or “Wikicclesia”— makes a lot of sense, even if we have never thought of it before.

Wikipedia: The encyclopedia that anyone can edit

Wikicclesia: The church that anyone can edit

 

He poses some good questions to the Church. How do we leave the comfort zone that has protected us for a thousand years? How do we enter the modern world that simply does not value the things that have so defined Church?

 

This does not mean that the tenets of the faith are no longer valued. This is more about the structure that has grown around our beliefs—that the “keepers” of the faith need to be somehow “certified,” and all capable people without this accreditation need to exist in subservience.

 

The system played an important role in a world where education was not widespread. There was always a temptation to follow religious “snake oil” salespeople.

 

We could argue that this is always the case—always a danger. Today, snake oil salespeople (even religious ones) are more easily exposed.

 

This is exactly the idea that Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia, builds on.

 

Predecessor encyclopedias spent a fortune finding experts to annually update topics they defined. Consumers spent fortunes making sure these valuable fonts of information were in their homes.

 

Wikipedia invited anyone to pose as an expert on any topic that interested them and let everyone else edit their work. They made the information available to all. For FREE!

 

The result has been a surprisingly accurate and amazingly timely source of information.

 

People take their areas of expertise seriously. They don’t want bad information out there.

 

Let’s assume people also take their faith seriously.

 

Can the church trust this “open source” culture?

 

The Church may have no choice.

 

Our new age of empowerment is exposing the flaws of the Church that have long been hidden by the cosmetics of tradition. A lot that defines church is no longer needed.

  1. The expenses of maintaining it are crippling.
  2. It is increasingly less effective.
  3. We are finding better ways.

 

Redeemer has unwittingly been an experimenter in the Wikicclesia concept. We set out with no other motive than to be the best Christian community we could, using the resources we have, while under attack from the very church that chartered to nurture us.

 

We learned that the way we traditionally “do church” is very limiting. In fact, it is turning off the modern faithful who find more fulfilling ways to live their faith.

 

As we used the internet, doors opened for us. Small as we are, we found we are able to make a huge difference.

 

The old way of doing “church” is all about pleasing others, doing things approved ways, showing  team spirit, supporting the system that provides clergy and publishes hymnals and curricula—and works hard to maintain. Nothing wrong with any of this. It is just reaching the end of its viability.

 

Many churches today will never be able to be effective as Christian community “the old way.” That doesn’t mean they cannot be active in mission and serve Christ and be viable in the modern world.

 

The ways of measuring Church must change.

 

The challenge to the Church is to find ways to grow in the 21st century, not to find fleeting ways to sustain the Church of the 20th century. We will never return to that time. That doesn’t mean there are not halcyon days awaiting.

 

Our experience may point the way to the new Wikicclesia.

Presenting Redeemer’s 2013 Annual Report

 

We present our 2013 Annual Report, which is only a glimpse of our very active ministry.

 

AnnualReport 2013

 

Read it and you will see that while banned from Church membership and structure, faith filled the void in exciting ways.

2×2/Redeemer Reaches Around the World

relief12×2 Relief Boxes Reach Pakistan

The story of Redeemer, 2×2 and the Church in Pakistan is remarkable.

Church leaders told us we were too small to fulfill a mission purpose. They were wrong. Small churches can contribute in big ways!

relief16

Even after church leaders took our building and our endowment funds, Redeemer kept on with our mission. We took it online.

The 2×2 website launched February 2, 2011. It wasn’t long before we were making mission friends all over the world. There are many amazing stories of mission collaboration that resulted. For now, we’ll focus on our friendship with the church in Pakistan.

2×2 was corresponding with church leaders in Pakistan for more than a year when terrorists bombs exploded killing hundreds of worshipers.

relief6They asked us to send a study Bible. We did. It was a small investment to test the water. They never got it. We weren’t sure we would ever be able to help outside of our online friendship. Too expensive. Too risky.

But then we saw the news of a church bombing in Pakistan featured ever so briefly on national media. We emailed asking if they were alright. The response came quickly. They were in hiding. There was no way of knowing if the violence had stopped. Many were killed (more than 200) and the injuries of those that survived were serious. They feared that Muslim hospitals would not provide adequate care to Christian patients. They were trying to care for serious injuries themselves. Many children were orphaned. They felt abandoned by the world.

Loyal Lutherans, we started to look for ways to help. We never voted to leave the ELCA, but the ELCA no longer recognized us. There was no one to call. SEPA Synod hadn’t returned our calls for years!

The ELCA divides the world and assigns each synod a region to support in mission. It is called the Companion Synod System. We checked the roster of companion synods with whom we might network. We learned the Middle East is largely overlooked. We looked up Lutheran World Relief. Their website showed no connection with Pakistan.

We asked Pakistani leaders what was needed. They were desperate for warm clothing for the children. They were preparing for a brutal winter.

relief3This would have been easy for Redeemer. Our church had lots of children. We would have had no problem collecting clothing. But our eviction, which forced the closing of a decades-old daycare center, had cost us access to families and hand-me-downs. We feared we could not help.

But we didn’t give up. We posted the need on our website. We got a few monetary donations and sent them to Pakistan. It took five trips to the bank to get the money transferred. It is difficult to wire money to Pakistan, the bank told us. But they did get what we sent this time!

We wanted to do more. There was practically no interest among western Christians about this horrific attack on people of our faith!

A subscriber to 2×2 called one day. I mentioned the need for clothing. She took the ball and ran.

relief8Keep in in mind that the fabricated reason for closing Redeemer was that our congregation was scattered and diminished. This was not true, but what happened next is proof that even if it were true, that phrase, so easily bandied about by professional church leaders, is no longer a valid way to measure ministry.

The 2×2 readers who went to work collecting clothing were in Michigan. Here in Philadelphia, we collected money.

Michigan 2×2 soon reported that they had filled an SUV with clothing.

They sorted, laundered and packed three large boxes of clothing and blankets. The next hurdle—shipping.

relief9Commercial shippers wanted $1500 to ship 62 pounds of clothing. We didn’t have $1500. We feared that all our work was for nothing. We shared our problems with the Pakistanis. “If we had $1500, we could buy the clothes we need,” they said.

But Michigan 2x2ers didn’t give up. They are close to Detroit. One of their business connections ships auto parts all over the world. They agreed to send our boxes. They wanted just $300. The money collected in Philadelphia would cover it!

PakistanShipmentThe boxes shipped shortly after Thanksgiving. They arrived in Pakistan the day before Christmas.

relief15Pakistani leaders documented the distribution with many pictures. Here are a few photos of the children receiving their warm winter clothing and blankets.

There are a few lessons to be learned from our experience.

  • Even the smallest churches can fulfill mission purposes.
  • There is no need for small churches to depend solely on regional or churchwide entities to do mission for them.
  • The strength of the church as we move into the connected age will be in the networks each congregation builds. This can be done on a shoestring budget. Amazing things can be done without hierarchical oversight.
  • The networks built need not be constrained by geography.
  • The gratification and sense of accomplishment of doing mission directly is greater and has more potential for involving lay people in hands-on ways than the current system.
    By the way, the region of the world that is assigned to SEPA under the ELCA Companion Synod System is Tanzania. Irony! While SEPA supports the church in Tanzania, SEPA evicted a congregation of mostly Tanzanian immigrants and cut them off from participation in their church here in the United States. One SEPA argument was that to reach out to East Africa immigrants, Redeemer had to first accept mission status. We knew that meant giving up property rights. It is  a greedy strategy devised to make all properties owned for decades or even centuries by  neighborhood congregations the property of the synod. The new populations of urban neighborhoods are seen as incapable of administering their own Christian community. If this sounds like it might be racist, make no mistake—it is. It is subtly returning to a dependency system that America worked hard to break away from.

We’ll share other amazing stories of international ministry resulting from our website in our annual report. It’s that time year!

relief2

Playing the Social Media “Like” Game

If You Want People to Like You
Give Them Something to Like

Looking for the “Like” is part of the Social Media game. It is seen as social proof.

It doesn’t really mean anything, but doesn’t it feel good?

Most churches aren’t very good at the “like” game because they have trouble breaking out of the “look at us” mode. The “like” becomes the social proof of a mutual admiration society.

Social Media in the hands of the Church remains, for the most part, a parish club. The evangelical power of the internet is lost. Really, who else would spend more than a few seconds on an “aren’t we great” site much less press a “like” button?

If the Church hopes to embrace the power of Social Media, it must address the community—not the present church community but the community in which the church exists in order to serve—you know—like Jesus did.

This is a big shift. We are used to addressing the people who come to us—the ones who make it to the pew. We’re almost out of existence in that regard, but we keep at it. Faithful to failure.

It’s our turn to go out into the world.

It’s never been easier, more possible, or less expensive. No excuses!

The first week of the new year, we will explore some strategies for Social Media.

We’ll look at Facebook first.

But here’s the gist of Social Media: If you want people to “like” you. Give them something worth “liking.”

Happy New Year!

Dealing with Church Community

The Best Way vs The Easy Way

Christians are no different from people in general. We tend to look for easy ways.

How many of you had a mother that routinely pointed out that no one promised an easy life?

There are plenty of examples in the Bible of just how true Mom’s advice is. But let’s not muddy up the New Year by referencing biblical examples.

Christians are all about building community.

Communities are messy things, intricately woven. The resulting tapestry can be beautiful.

There is no easy way. But that won’t stop church leaders from trying.

This is a good week to think about Christian community. This coming Sunday’s lessons are all about facing the challenges of life where God planted us.

Remember, God wasn’t afraid to stick his only Son right in the middle of a big mess.

I was reading the Alban Weekly blog this week. They are pushing a book about relations with former pastors.

Here is an example where the Church often advocates the easy approach. Pastors are taught to separate themselves completely from a congregation when they leave. No contact. No funerals (either attending or presiding). No weddings. No attendance at worship. No coffee meetups with the friends made over decades of service. Some pastors are advised to not talk to the next pastor. The theory is that no prejudices should be passed on—as if that’s the only thing pastors share!

The new pastor is supposed to be presented with a sterile environment. Make life easier for everyone. Remove allegiance. Remove choices. And in doing so, remove humanity.

What an artificial approach!

Perhaps this comes from the day when pastors lived in parsonages and leaving the community was almost a necessity.

Perhaps it comes from the day when the internet was not around and connecting was harder.

Today, most pastors purchase their own homes. The spouses are often employed in the community. They and the children have no reason to take orders from regional leaders. They can go to church and maintain friendships as they please.

The pastor may be moving on to a different job—not another church far away. The pastor and the pastor’s family will continue to be part of the community.

Continuity. Longevity. Networking. Incoming pastors are taught to see these as threatening—an obstacle to leadership. An excuse for failure.

This is baloney.

Collegiality and a passion for helping among all clergy and lay leaders will trump territorialism. We need each other today.

Train pastors with integrity, unselfish motivation and good judgement. Train pastors to talk with one another. Not selfish gossip. Honest communication tempered with common sense.

Stop creating a phony environment.

A congregation is not a clean slate on which an incoming pastor will write pristine words of wisdom. The pastor will not mold the congregation. Congregations are more likely to mold the pastor!

Lay people are not pawns in the hands of either the new or old pastor. No interim ministry, no matter how long or well-orchestrated, will change that. The congregation will build on its past and find strength in that.

There is no way to keep people from connecting. Church leaders that attempt to isolate congregations from their past are fighting a losing battle.

This standard practice has led to abuses. The advice is stretched to the ridiculous. Bishops actually look at congregations and suggest that certain members will have to go before a new pastor will be agree to serve. Heaven forbid lay leaders have influence.

Transitions are managed for the comfort of clergy.

The extension of faulty reasoning continues. Property will have to be turned over to the regional body before pastoral recommendations will be made. When “easy” is the goal, this makes sense despite what the rules of the church may be.

Communities grow. The new will add to what has been.

Don’t haul out the pruning analogy. It’s just plain mean — especially when the lives and property of lay people are the targets.

Churches are made up of people, not trees.

The Value of Visual Worship

annunciationWe Live in A Visual World
But Worship Mostly with Sound

Often our worship traditions are based on state-of-the-art thinking or at least what was state-of-the-art decades or centuries ago. Unfortunately, traditions sometimes become so embedded that we don’t realize that the reason we did things the way we did them 50 or 100 years ago is that this was the best we could do with the tools available at the time.

Stained-glass windows served an educational purpose in the Middle Ages when few could read and the worship service was conducted in Latin for people who didn’t speak Latin (another example of tradition outliving any value by centuries). Window artisans outnumbered printers back then. Other way around today!

In the New World, we kept creating stained glass windows because they were the state of the art in the lands of our heritage. They are still beautiful but they are a bit limiting. Our visual expectations are much different today. And while some traditions (Orthodox, for example) value meditation on imagery, that has never caught on in other denominations. We like our attention focused on pageantry.

There was a time when hymnals were the church bulletin. A church bulletin from the 1950s typically had little but a the bared-boned order of worship. No one expected much from a mimeograph machine. (I used to watch my preacher father make the stencils and attach them to the cylinder and crank away.)

Around this time church publishers realized they could add to the visual experience by publishing colored bulletin shells with an ad for a national church program on the back. (Designing them was my job back in the 1980s.) By this time, the mimeograph had been mothballed and photocopying became the norm.

By the late 1990s, color laser printing became more affordable and available. New printers could handle different sizes of paper, too. Many churches realized this is something they could manage without purchasing the shells. There goes a source of revenue for the national church!

Despite new possibilities, almost no churches are exploring the development of the church bulletin as a worship/teaching tool. (Redeemer was doing this!)

We live in a visually driven era. How things look makes a difference in how we learn, think and make decisions. Worship, however, still focuses on the ear. When churches say they are holding a contemporary worship service it usually extends no further than the choice of music. Everything else is right from the Middle Ages.

We’ve lived through the age of architecture being the visual communicator, to black and white printing, to pre-formatted color printing to the capabilities of custom-color printing and the exciting medium of the internet which encompasses word, image, and sound with unlimited potential and practically no cost! Really, no church has to print a bulletin anymore. Members can pull them up in cost-free living color on their smart phones or pads! But we are still telling people to turn them off during worship instead of using them to enhance worship!

Traditions are the priority. As far as visuals go, we are still preaching in Latin!

It’s time to consider how to communicate and express ourselves visually.

We worship the God who created the rainbow.

That’s why 2×2 features collections of images to accompany worship. It’s the tip of an iceberg!

Here’s a link that discusses the power of the visual in our decision-making today.

Analyzing Key Word Searches

“Small Congregation Overworked, Pastor Lazy”

One of the benefits of having a church blog is that you can find out what is on people’s mind. Blogs provide a list of the words people have plugged into their search engine (Google, Yahoo, Bing, etc.) in order to land on your site.

Today someone plugged in “small congregation overworked, pastor lazy.”

Redeemer is a small congregation and our people are overworked at least as measured by any normal volunteer church efforts.

For many years we had no pastor. If lay people didn’t step up, no one would.

Maybe pastors saw our little part of God’s kingdom as too much work. Those words spoken by a Synod representative ten years ago are hard to forget. “Ministry in East Falls is not good use of the Lord’s money.”

We suspect that the deprivation of leadership was by design. Our assets were targeted for 25 years. Our assets provided incentive to create conditions for failure in East Falls. Accepting a call with any anticipation of success meant defying the prejudices of leadership. Redeemer was not a church to be served by any pastor with upwardly mobile career ambitions. Calls issued by God rarely do!

But were the few pastors we encountered lazy? Some of them were. Some of them were focused on their own ambitions and sense of purpose. But their reluctance was not necessarily motivated by fear of hard work.

Some of them found themselves serving with inadequate training. They arrived with established ideas and packaged formulas for urban neighborhood ministry. They would provide these services after they did the normal pastoral duties. They would structure their work-week around sermon preparation, clergy gatherings, committees and visiting the sick.

All of this is care-taking, not church-building.

Many of the pastors sent our way were ill-prepared for the realities of urban ministry. Cities tend to be very diverse and fast-changing. Pastors are trained with goals of longevity and traditions. There was often a sense that they would do what was expected of them, whether or not their efforts advanced mission.

Evangelism, therefore, is often relegated to the laity. If pastors have little training in evangelism, lay people are likely to have none. The mission work of the church becomes fund-raising for someone else to implement mission. Easier to fund bricks and mortar than community-building.

Sadly, there are never enough funds for the work that needs to be done.

Lazy, no. Lost, yes.

 

From Whence Cometh Church Innovation

Why Transformation in the ELCA Is Unlikely

The Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (SEPA / ELCA) recently posted a link on its Facebook page from a Methodist Conference that discussed the role of clergy in church transformation.

It referenced the work of Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations. His work studied innovation in farming.

Rogers found the implementers of new ideas broke into the following categories:

  • 2.5% were Innovators. They were educated, had means and were risk-oriented.
  • Early Adopters followed them. They were young, educated and community leaders.
  • Then came the Early Majority. They were conservative but open to new ideas.
  • The Late Majority were older, less educated, conservative and less socially active.
  • Laggards were very conservative had the smallest farms and little capital.

The article argued that clergy could not be effective innovators within their parish role. They place the clergy somewhere between early adopters and the effective implementation that follows.

innovation-700x386Perhaps this is true within Methodist circles.

The Lutheran Bell Curve would probably find clergy at the other end of the spectrum. It is probably a disproportionate number, eating into the hump of the Bell Curve.

innovation2-700x386

  • Lutheran clergy, at least in our area, are older.
  • Lutheran churches in our area are smaller.
  • Lutheran leaders at every level are desperate for capital. That equity should be a tool for the congregation’s use, but regional bodies covet it.
  • Lutheran clergy, by some measure, are less socially active. (Search Lutheran clergy on LinkedIn and see how many are connected and how many of them post their profiles publicly.)
  • Lutheran clergy are becoming increasingly enamored with and dependent upon hierarchy which makes them less likely to explore risk. Innovation without risk is unlikely.

Given these factors, the Lutheran Church will lag in innovation if we depend on professional leaders. Clergy already turn to laity for implementation of most church work. But the control reins hold them back.

Add a few other factors. Lutheran regional leadership, desperate for capital, hover over member congregations waiting for signs of failure. The incentive to assist with innovation is not there. Innovation takes capital! Most of that capital tends to go toward salaries with inconsequential accountability.

Caretaker and part-time ministries rarely lead to innovation but they abound. Pastors inclined toward innovation must be careful. Would-be innovators do so in an unfair arena where leadership is protected by separation of church and state and lay innovators accept personal risk. They may not know it! Ask the laity of Redeemer in East Falls who were named personally in lawsuits by SEPA Synod, while the actions of clergy were protected under separation of church and state.

Laity step up when caretaker ministries are in place, but their leadership is often unappreciated by clergy, who even with part-time status want full-time oversight and credit for success. Failure? The laity can take the credit for that!

Beware! Laity inclined toward innovation do so at their own risk. They may even risk the mission of the church if their leadership threatens the perceived turf of professional leaders.

Yet transformation is not going to happen without a fully empowered laity.

Dedicated laity bring skills to the table that the church desperately needs. When they go unappreciated or are seen as threatening, innovation is squashed.

Laggards swim in the wake. They see the opportunity to sustain things as they are by seizing property, capital and equity.

Consequently, transformation will not happen any time soon. Talk won’t get you there! Visibly aligning with the few charismatic rising stars among the clergy won’t work either. Feature them at Synod Assemblies and Bishop’s Convocations and hope their energy fuels a local movement. Will it catch on without an infrastructure to support it? Not likely. Looks good, though!

This is 2×2’s (Redeemer’s) experience in the ELCA.
Our ministry was already getting attention for innovation back in 2006.
Enter SEPA Synod with its recurring six-figure annual deficit, legal team and locksmith.
SPLAT!

The Lutheran Church desperately needs to empower the laity. They just don’t know how.