4/7InkzHVUEQeEdU9vpc1tikzEhChrKmPfvXI-FSDBrBQ

Commentary

Ten Reasons Churches Die

Why do churches fail?Churches Get Lots of Help Along the Road to Failure

I am adapting 10 observations drawn from David DiSalvo’s post published in Forbes Magazine.

He describes ten reasons businesses die. They apply to churches, too.

1. As Yoda said, you just don’t believe it.

Luke Skywalker says, “I just don’t believe it.” Yoda answers, “That is why you fail.”

For all the talk about faith and belief, the Church often acts as if we do not believe our own message. We don’t believe small churches can survive, so we do nothing to help. Our leaders see no economic incentive in helping small churches. Regional bodies see themselves as better managers of money. They often are not. When the assets of one closed church dry up, they look for another small church to loot. The altruistic promises made to justify the seizures, are quickly forgotten. No one really analyzes where the money goes.

Bishop Almquist told us our assets were being put into a Mission Fund. It was later revealed that the Mission Fund fills the synod’s own spending deficits (which were frequently in the healthy six-figures). A few weeks ago we learned that Holy Spirit’s assets would go to The Bishop’s Emergency Fund. Does anyone know what that means?

Belief in the purposes of church—as in life—is foundational to success. More, when we believe in an all-powerful, merciful and gracious God. If we in the pew don’t believe and the regional body has self-interest in our failure — we have a problem.

2. Other people have convinced you of your “station.”

This brings to mind the school principal who fired a teacher when she learned that the teacher had told students from poor urban neighborhoods that they would never amount to anything.

We need this principal’s kind of leadership in the Church.

Any church leader who goes to a small congregation, accepting a salary, with the message that the congregation will never amount to much should be history.

Redeemer was lucky. Bishop Almquist had left us to die. “You’ll die a natural death in ten years,” he told us. He refused to provide even a caretaker pastor. But we found a part-time pastor who served us for three years. He told us we could be a flagship church. We believed. While SEPA was waiting out the ten years, we began to grow.

DiSalvo quotes Tennessee Williams. “A high station in life is earned by the gallantry with which appalling experiences are survived with grace.”

3. You don’t want to be a disruptor.

DiSalvo writes:

Disruption means that consistency, stability and certainty might get jettisoned for a time, and that puts our hard-wired internal defense system on high alert. Sometimes, though, you have to override the alarms and move ahead anyway.  If you never do, you’ll never know what could happen.

Disruptive innovation is discouraged in the Church. We talk about innovation and change, but are ill-prepared for it.

Redeemer had put aside old expectations as we forged new ministry and began to experience success. SEPA allowed alarms to go off without ever sharing our successes.

 4. You think “what if I die tomorrow?”

We stop trying because we foresee our own demise. The Church feeds into this with its “caretaker ministries” concepts.  They use language like palliative care and putting the congregation on hospice. They use these terms and act appalled when people suggest they orchestrating the closing of churches. Meanwhile, we may be transforming into something the experts don’t yet recognize.

5. You wonder how you will be remembered.

We all want to leave a legacy. The Church feeds into this idea, too.

Our pastor in 2008 met with the bishop and never returned to our church. He sent word that rumors were being spread that he was leading a rebellion and he feared his reputation being ruined. A rebellion? A church defends its ministry and it is seen as rebellion! Bishop Burkat shamelessly used the fear of tarnished legacy to fuel her cause. She wrote in a letter to all pastors.

In the case of Redeemer, leaders did not cooperate with us and instead resisted tenaciously in an adversarial manner that publicly tarnishes the wonderful memory of ministry that has taken place in the East Falls community since 1891.

Small churches must learn to live in today’s world and guard against any appearance that protecting the past is mission.

6. You think there must be a pre-established role for your life.

This is part of the church model. We are who others tell us we are.  Don’t dare step beyond your role — even if the role you played historically no longer has a need in today’s world. Instead of using our assets to explore new ways of meeting needs, the Church attempts to find new places where the old ways might still work. They call this mission and celebrate it as innovative. It is not; it is replication. Chances are such replicated ministries will fail soon after the publicity value wears off.

SEPA’s vision of Redeemer was that of a small family church. Redeemer started to transform from a small white congregation in a working class neighborhood to an international church in a growing collegiate neighborhood. SEPA was unprepared to serve us. They had been counting on our failure for 10 years!

DiSalvo writes that these pre-defined roles (agency) “is a figment our brains rely on to manage difficulty with as little trauma as possible. The first thing to do is recognize that….”

7. Your career appears to be well-established and that’s good, right?

We all know the role of the small church. Serve the immediate neighborhood with the message of God’s love. Support a pastor to the best of our ability. Maintain the property. (Not necessarily in that order.) But what if you stepped out of that role and began to serve in new and innovative ways? How would the church react? (It isn’t always pretty.)

8. You are afraid of losing what you have built.

DiSalvo ponts out that this is beyond our control. There is always a danger of losing what we have built. It should not determine your ministry. Unfortunately, in the Church, there are people ready to help us lose what we have built. This fear of being a victim of hierarchical greed is actually crippling the potential of the church. Lutheran congregations used to be fairly independent. It’s written into our founding documents as “interdependent.” But lately, congregations are looking to the bishop’s office for approval of decisions that are constitutionally theirs to make independently. This is what happens when you start forcing church closures. Congregations start to live in fear.

9. You think “maybe I’ve hit my ceiling.”

Many small churches stop trying. Pastors often stop trying. Synods encourage this when they use terms like caretaker and hospice ministries. Small churches must fight this mindset. But that, we learned, can be dangerous!

Why do churches fail?10. Confusion about where to go.

This is a huge problem in the church because the Church really has no vision for where it is going. Frequently, the people we look to in the Church as visionaries are people who have found a way to preserve the concept of Church as we understood it in the past. They are few. These pastors write books about their successes, hoping they will help others. Some of them are pretty good books! These successes are, however, often the result of a serendipitous combination of personalities and circumstances that is hard to replicate.

The Church, I suspect, is headed someplace very different than what we have known. At 2×2, we are excited to be part of it—even as we have been made to feel so very unwelcome in it.

photo credit: komehachi888 via photopin cc
photo credit: Krissy.Venosdale via photopin cc

Social Media—Revealing the Real You

manbehindthecurtainPeeping Out from Behind the Curtain

2x2virtualchurch.com has been an experiment in using social media in the realm of religion. We started in February 2011, following a WordPress how-to book.

Wait a minute? I just wrote “we.”

2×2 is a “we.” Our members subscribe, comment on posts (usually off line), suggest direction and lend support. We get together every week and discuss 2×2’s direction. But the writing on 2×2, for the most part, is an “I” job.

One thing I’ve learned about social media—it is hard to write that word “I.” I posted for nearly a year without using it. I was thinking about “we,” so I thought it was the fair way to represent our mission.

However, in this journey of discovery as an online ministry, we/I have discovered that the word “I” is more powerful than the communal “we.”

“We” can become a crutch. The person saying “we” can say with confidence almost anything. There will be someone in a group that thinks that way. The more and louder you speak, the less likely those that disagree are going to speak up.

“We” can be an excuse for thinkers with ideas that aren’t fully cooked. It becomes an army of phantom support — like the Wizard of Oz. Pull back the curtain and what do you see?

“We” can become theologically lazy. “Well, if that’s what everyone else thinks, they must be right.”

It can take centuries to undo the sometimes tragic results of “we” thinking.

This is especially hard in church work. Church/congregations are communal in nature. We are used to expressing ourselves as a group. That’s what church hierarchy is about—making sure the voice of the church is authentic to the word of God.

The practice began with authentic concern but has morphed in the modern world (and probably long before the modern world) to being a shield—protecting influence and sanitizing the behaviors of church leaders who we all know are just as human as everyone else—capable of sacrifical love, tempted by selfish interests. It becomes crippling to the millions of church thinkers who don’t have a platform in the church — unless they blog!

When we consider the consequences the power the word “I” carries in church work, it is no wonder we refrain from using it. A Martin Luther or his modern namesake—King, a Ghandhi, a Bonhoeffer don’t pop up until things are really, really off track. Saying “I” in the “we” society of church can make life’s journey pretty rocky.

2×2 has learned that “I” is a more powerful word than “we.” The more personal our posts have become in recent months, the faster our traffic has grown. Admitting that I am one person within the group that sponsors 2×2 (Redeemer Lutheran Church, East Falls) is honest. People connect to individuals more easily than to groups. Online readers appreciate honesty.  They’ll keep you honest, too! A writer thinks twice when he uses the word I in the sentence.

In two years, 2×2 has grown from one visitor per month to 2500 per month, doubling its monthly average in the first two months of 2013. (We suspect little Redeemer, has become the congregation with the biggest following and widest reach of any church in the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America —SEPA/ELCA.)

There is power in the vulnerability of the word “I.” That one letter is difficult, at first, to type. The advice was always there in the how-to books: write as an individual. It takes a while to become comfortable with the idea that yes, these are MY ideas. I am putting them out there for others to criticize. It becomes powerful when others add their 2¢. The “we” that “I” serve in writing this blog starts to make a difference.

That’s how we all grow in faith. By practicing the “I” word. And remembering that every “I” is a child of God. Every “I” that is part of Redeemer matters. That’s the story I tell.

I think.

I care.

I love.

I hurt.

I enjoy.

I need help.

I can help.

I was made in God’s image for a reason.

So were you!

What do you think?

Photo: 1939 MGM movie The Wizard of Oz

Blogging Your Sermon—Go Live with the Gospel Online

In general, the sermon is a dead medium. Quite possibly, a sermon is well-reasoned and based in sound theology. It may impart important information about understanding the text. It may be delivered from the heart even when read.

This is accepted in the world of church. Preachers preach. Congregations listen.

Yet frequently the medium of sermon, central to the church experience, lacks the power that live interaction can give—even though they ARE live! Ironic!  Live may not be the most lively!

The temptation, which makes sense, is to preach to the people who are there—to meet the expectations of the people who give their offerings—until the offerings run out.

Today there are far fewer people in church listening. Most of the listeners are over 50 and presumably still have an attention span that lasts longer than 20 minutes (even if our short-term memories are just a memory). There are practically no children in church.

The offerings are going to run out.

Yet the delivery of the 20-minute sermon is still the norm. Preachers preach. Congregations listen. Seminaries are still working hard to teach preachers to do this well.

Some of them do!

Many of them don’t.

One of the faults of the preaching world is that no one reviews or critiques pastors once they complete seminary training. Preachers rarely hear other preachers speak. They are isolated in those pulpits! They are what they are.

There is no place more status quo in the Church than the pulpit.

We listeners at Redeemer have heard a lot of sermons from a lot of pastors. Our versatility in listening to preachers is a by-product of having no pastor most of the time for a decade or so. We had supply pastors. This has continued in our rejected status within the church as we attend other churches and listen to an unending string of “supply” pastors.

In our experience, we have heard some supply pastors give the same sermon unaltered a half-dozen times. We’ve heard a few others ramble about the morning news — preaching the newspaper was the theory. Failure to prepare was often more evident.

We’ve had sermons read to us. We’ve had sermons rambled at us. We have become familiar with formula sermons that build to a climax and drop us right into the post-sermon hymn.

We have heard some good sermons. Good as they were, they aren’t remembered long.

Preaching in a sanctuary is an opportunity to shine—to inspire and reach each set of ears in a personal way. But there is something about the format that no longer resonates with today’s world. It may be too late to recover.

The missing element may be immediacy. Three examples.

We live in a world where news is instantaneous. We are likely to hear it from a stranger nearby—like the guy on a cell phone in the theater lobby during intermission who loudly reports the score of the playoff game to every disgruntled mate who was forced to choose between the theater and the TV screen.

I was in an airplane when the news broke that ObamaCare had passed. Each passenger was busy about their own business, until a young-20-something announced the news. A lively debate was struck crossing the aisles and over the backs of seats. It continued as we filed out the aisle and into the terminal.

I attended a boychoir concert one Sunday afternoon. The choir was very professional and poised. Suddenly, and fortunately in between numbers, the back row of teen boys erupted with inexplicable joy. One of the tenors was wired and had passed the news that the local football favorite had scored a winning touchdown.

News is fresh. Vital. Interesting, Relevant. Necessary to our lives. Catalytic at is finest.

We seem to have lost these qualities in the telling of the Good News.

Delivering the Good News once a week may have fit the slower-paced life of yesteryear. It may still have an important place in today’s world, but it is not the most effective way to reach the most people.

Yet we listeners are locked in. Congregations still pay a hefty fee, often a mission-crippling fee, to make sure there is a preacher present in the sanctuary each week, preaching to a dwindling audience. It is live, but it is not lively.

Blogging, on the other hand, is live in a different sense. It is interactive. It reaches beyond sanctuary walls. It creates a following who are motivated to share. It allows you to address local problems in real time — not waiting until Sunday to muster the energy of the faithful to act. (By then they will probably do little more than pray.) Blogging is THE medium made for modern preachers.

Very, very few have been able to switch gears.

Change comes hard. But it does come. For the art of preaching to survive, it must adapt to the modern audience.

The church audience today is not in church.

We are online.  (Click to Tweet)

February 24 — A Day of Infamy

Today Bishop Claire Burkat of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America will gather her little chicks under her wing at Holy Spirit Lutheran Church in NE Philadelphia and celebrate its closure. They’ve been moving toward this date for the last year, since they sold the property to the United Church of Christ—and probably still longer.

This is also the fifth anniversary of Bishop Claire Burkat’s attempt to stealthily seize Redeemer’s property in East Falls. It was on February 24, 2008, that Bishop Burkat invited herself to our church supposedly to plan a closing service for a congregation that had never even discussed closing much less been given an opportunity to vote on it as is constitutionally necessary. She brought about nine or ten people with her with no notice, despite the fact that the congregation had warned her that the date she had chosen with no consultation with church leaders was already booked and that the congregation did not wish to meet at that time. The two members of Redeemer who met her that day were soon to discover that her plans had nothing to do with planning a worship service. Among her posse was SEPA’s lawyer who was waiting behind the building and out of sight in a locksmith’s van. When their strategy called for the lawyer and locksmith to make their presence known we don’t know. We had been forewarned by someone in Chicago that she was intending such a move and so when we saw the locksmith van go by, we were prepared.

The bishop’s embarrassment that day, which sparked five years of vindictive law suits, has cost mission and ministry in our neighborhood dearly.

There was never an attempt to work with us — we were not valued enough to be part of the discussion of our future. The names of our lay leaders were dragged through the mud—an attempt to validate Synod’s actions. The work of the laity was treated with total disregard. The people of Redeemer deserved the opportunity to work with and be in discussion with SEPA just as the people of Holy Spirit have been.

SEPA’s Articles of Incorporation forbid the Synod from confiscating congregational property without the consent of the congregation.

The more SEPA congregations allow this very important foundation of Lutheran polity to be ignored, the more endangered each congregation is.

Redeemer’s Ambassadors have now visited 56 SEPA congregations. We know that many of them are no stronger and more than a few are weaker than Redeemer. If Redeemer’s statistics were the reason for closing, about ten to twenty percent of the remaining 160 congregations should also be closed with more suffering the same fate within a decade or two if innovative steps aren’t taken.

We have always known that Redeemer’s property and endowment were the real attractions. In April of 2008, we discovered that Bishop Burkat had offered our property for sale to a Lutheran Agency without a word to our congregation. We learned this from a letter from the agency, dated in early April (only about 40 days after the February 24 showdown), informing us that they had done an extensive site evaluation and were denying the offer of sale. The timing suggests that the property, owned by the congregation, had been offered for sale even before Bishop Burkat came to the congregation—all without the knowledge of the congregation. Clearly NOT Luthean polity.

SEPA needed our money—quick and easy. This devious situation fueled the character assassination, personal attacks and refusal to work with Redeemer that has characterized the court battles. But SEPA seems to be unable to check and balance their leadership — as their constitutions call for.

In September 2009, Bishop Burkat at last achieved her goal. She locked out the members of Redeemer.

Undaunted, Redeemer continues its mission, achieving its greatest success with our online ministry. We have broken new ground in mission which is being recognized by other denominations if not our own!

While some members of SEPA Synod are celebrating the closure of a church, others are meeting on this date in Lansdale and on Monday in Burholme to talk about communications. Redeemer and its website, 2x2virtualchurch.com, could contribute a great deal to a discussion with church communicators. We have a ton of experience!

But we’ve been banished—ex“communicated.”

Settled Pastors in an Unsettling World

“There are no pastors for you.”

Bishop Roy Almquist told Redeemer this at the turn of this century as a prelude for doing nothing to serve our congregation in his second six-year term.

He may have been very right.

It is no accident that small churches vastly outnumber large congregations. People are attracted to small congregations. Sociologically, an ideal congregation has about 150 members.

The model congregation must have 300 members to support the financial expectations of clergy and the regional body—and that’s before they do a lick of ministry or mission. When a congregation gets that big, it loses some of the qualities that attract many people to church.

A broader geographic area is needed to support this model which makes it more difficult for the congregation to stay in touch with the local needs.

The model is presented as economically desirable — fewer churches serving more people. But statistics show that fewer churches are serving fewer people. Statistics overall are down.

This model relies on the concept of a “settled pastor”— a pastor who serves a congregation for some seven years or ideally for decades. This is unrealistic today and is not likely to lead to church growth.

The epidemic of church closures is a result of a failure to adapt—hanging on to a dying model until it is too much work to turn things around—although it is probably still possible.

To survive in a diverse, quickly changing community culture, congregations need flexibility. They need to draw on professional skills that one person is unlikely to have. They may need these services for only six months, but they can’t get them because their money and fealty is tied up in one “settled pastor.”

Perhaps the growing number of clergy taking interim pastor training is a sign that they recognize that the “settled pastor” model will no longer advance the church from either the clergy or lay point of view.

The interim approach — a short-term plug for a hole which will eventually be filled more permanently — may need adjusting. It puts the management of congregations in the hands of the regional bodies—with which the congregations don’t have any day-to-day knowledge or relations. Similarly, regional bodies know only what they are told about the congregations by people with a vested interest. The odds for misinterpretation are good.

Congregational control of their own ministry — the Lutheran way — is slipping away. Attitudes are changing as the regional bodies rely more and more on their power and less on their sense of service. Congregations begin to defer decisions and rights that are constitutionally theirs. It doesn’t take long for this to become “the norm.” Congregations that insist on their rights are ridiculed and shunned—the Redeemer experience.

We will talk about this more in a later post, but this abandonment put us in an ideal position to experiment. And we were experiencing success.

The only answer many congregations hear is that they should continue to pour money down a non-producing hole until they are drained both financially and spiritually. Then, unable to meet the future, there is a grand celebration of the past as the regional body shutters the church and walks off with the spoils. Such a celebration is scheduled this week at Holy Spirit in NE Philadelphia.

We can’t help but wonder what might have been.

Art for Luke 13:31-35 — Jesus Is Disillusioned

O_Jerusalem-1The Fox and the Hens

Next Sunday’s gospel features a moving image that has never quite caught the imagination of artists. He starts his discourse sniping at Herod, calling him a fox. But he quickly moves on. Jesus compares his feelings for Jerusalem to a hen protecting her brood — but the brood is unwilling.

The headline art simply depicts Jesus contemplating the city which housed God’s earthly temple.

dominus-flevit-henToday, in modern Jerusalem, in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, there is a mosaic with the words of scripture surrounding the image. “But you are unwilling” drips in red at the feet of little chicks.

Artists seem to be much more comfortable with other biblical metaphors. There are numerous images of rushing streams, stars, bread, the lion and the lamb—even the rooster crowing, but this poignant image of a mother hen never grabs us.

Perhaps this is because the metaphor was first delivered by a disillusioned Jesus. Do we feel guilty?

Perhaps it is because it is a feminine image in a religion long-dominated by men

It is less likely to be taken on by today’s artists. There was a day when most homes had a few chickens pecking the ground in the back yard — a living refrigerator. But the sight is uncommon today.

???????????????????????????????Nevertheless, one young contemporary sculptor rose to the challenge, entering a biblical art contest.

Jesus’ imagery grabs at our hearts and our consciences. We are his little chicks — like it or not.

The Pope is Quitting. Who will fill his shoes?

There is a job opening in Rome.

The pope has resigned—the first time in 600 years a pope has stepped down before being called on the carpet by his Boss.

Joseph Ratzinger’s legacy as pope has drawn many comments that are less than gracious. They reveal disillusion and anger at hierarchy for ignoring pain and wrongdoing in the parishes for decades.

Ignoring isn’t the right word. They didn’t ignore the problems. They protected themselves and their clergy brethren at the expense of the weak and powerless.

Every six comments or so a supporter will speak up for the pope or the church, but their reasoning is not getting much traction.

The response over all was “Who cares.”

We suspect a great many care. People are just tired of their care being used. They are being driven from the Church they love and want to keep loving.

A movie was made shortly after the death of Pope John Paul II. It is an Italian film, subtitled in English. It is a charming story of the naming of a papal successor. Fictitious to be sure, but fiction often serves a realistic purpose. It is called in English “We Have A Pope.” Now might be a good time to rent it and review it. The sequestered College of Cardinals might take two hours and watch it before they begin deliberating.

I saw it about six months ago in a local theater. I had never before been to a movie that brought such cross criticism from the audience as they left the theater — from some viewers anyway. They didn’t like the ending, which I won’t reveal here.

I thought the ending was hopeful and the movie leading up to the ending was delightful — and I’m not a fan of subtitled movies.

The church faces many serious questions. These questions don’t tend to be asked within the church for obvious reasons. But the questions are out there and the answers are buried in the discontent that is revealed in the reaction to the current news.

All these questions can be summed up in just one:

Do we need a pope?

Perhaps the job should remain open for a while to see what is actually needed from those who find themselves leading the faithful. The faithful who invest their time, offerings, passion and very salvation following the teachings of hierarchy deserve this reevaluation.

Here’s something to remember. One of the greatest bishops ever rose to the position without being a church member at all.

Perhaps it is time for the Roman Catholic Church to look outside the box for new leadership—before the box becomes a coffin.

Overcoming the fear of Social Media

horseGet ready for the Horseless Carriage

Get ready for Social Media

Many congregations are interested in adding Social Media to their ministries. And so they dabble. They find someone to start a Facebook page. They lean back and relax. That’s done. Innovation isn’t so hard, after all!

Here’s the thing about Social Media.

Social Media is more than Facebook. Much more!

If your congregation embraces Social Media it will mean everything changes.

Social Media, fully embraced, is not a simple add-on — like adding an extra worship service.

It is transforming.

Transforming? Isn’t that what our church leaders have been demanding of congregations for the last decade with little definition of exactly what they mean?

Social Media—fully embraced—will affect every aspect of your ministry in positive and profound ways.

People need to be prepared. The only way to prepare people is to involve them and encourage flexibility. It helps to actually get started!

My family had lunch today in a historic inn along the famous Lincoln Highway. We got to talking about the history of the highway. It seems the opening of this newfangled cross-continental roadway that followed the introduction of the automobile came with no small amount of angst.

The big fear was that the horses of the early 20th century would not be happy.

Unhappy horses meant unhappy drivers.

A plan was developed.

Step 1: Prepare the horses. Warn them. Something new is coming.

Early drivers of horseless carriages were encouraged to carry flares with them. Upon approaching a horse-drawn carriage, they were to shoot up a warning flare. (Bet that went over big!)

Step 2: Protect the horses’ sense of security.

If horses were not reassured by flares (and why would they be?), then drivers were encouraged to carry camouflage. At the sight of a distressed horse, they should be prepared to pull to the side of the road and drape their automobile with a sheet designed to make the car disappear into the surroundings. What the horse doesn’t see will not be scary.

Step 3: Dismantle the horseless carriage.

If a horse is still disturbed by its new competition, drivers should be prepared to dismantle their automobile and hide the pieces along the side of the road until the horse passes as if nothing has changed.

All of this is, of course, absurd — especially to us Pennsylvanians who share the roads with our Amish neighbors. The horses seem to have adapted!

But this is a typical agenda for those who fear change.

  • Warn people of innovation.
  • Protect them from innovation.
  • Be prepared to dismantle all the progress and benefits possible from innovation at the first sign of distress (real or imaginary).

Churches intent on incorporating social media must be prepared to meet the same sorts of resistance.

It will mean doing things very differently — across the board. The very structure of church will change.

Expect something like this:

  • Social Media is clearly too much work for one pastor. But pastors are used to controlling communication in the church. Lay people cannot be expected to handle so much responsibility. Best to wait. And wait. And wait.
  • What do we do if Social Media actually works and lots of new people join a church? (This was a problem Redeemer was dealing with as 49 people joined in one year.) What if those 49 people become a voting block with the potential to ruin any plans made before they joined. Our congregation was dealing with this issue head-on and making progress. But our denomination, intent on Redeemer failing so they could claim our property, couldn’t deal with change they hadn’t orchestrated. They skipped right to Step 3: Dismantle everything! They kicked out the 49 new members along with the 25 or so older members and locked the church doors. 

These are real problems but they are good problems that need solutions. Dismantling everything because things aren’t like they used to be is just plain silly—and it is counter to Christian mission.

Fortunately, there are real solutions waiting to be discovered.

The automobile is now the norm.

The new church that arises from the use of Social Media will soon be the norm, too — and it all may happen just in time to save the mainline church.

photo credit: NCReedplayer via photopin cc

B to B or B to C? Or maybe churches are C to C?

Business people know marketing jargon, so when they meet up at a networking event, they know that when someone asks them if they are B to B or B to C, they are being asked if their business serves other businesses (B to B) or if their business serves consumers (B to C).

This language doesn’t apply much to the church world — or does it? The national church and the regional bodies are B to B. They are a church Body serving another church Body.

Congregations are more B to C. Their church Body serves individual Christians.

The concept is worth examining with fresh eyes and maybe a twist on this old business analogy.

The Church is actually C to C in two different ways.

Christian to Christian. That’s how evangelism works. It’s a play on the Frank Laubach missionary maxim, taught to all Lutheran children of the 60s. “Each one teach one.”

Or

Congregation to Congregation. Historically, the church has been very weak in congregations communicating, sharing and serving one another. There are token niceties exchanged at seminars and assemblies, but generally, it’s every congregation for itself. Pastoral turf and competition for members block the doorway for inter-church cooperation. They pull together to save money on church supplies, but that’s where cooperation often ends.

For the Evangelism Tools of the Future to Work this MUST Change

Social Media, the greatest evangelism tool the church has ever encountered, both creates and depends on connectedness. Congregations now need to work together. Without inter-church cooperation, which includes pastors cooperating, efforts at social media will quickly peter out.

Social Media thrives on content. Individual congregations are going to be challenged in feeding the content beast. But if they start working with other congregations, they will expand their possibilities.

How will this work? Here’s a possible scenario.

Lutheran youth in our area are planning a mission trip to an Indian Reservation. This common venture is supported by member churches and their individual youth groups.

An individual congregation might  put an article on their website or newsletter announcing the project. They might put a donate button as a call to action — and that would be that.

A more ambitious approach would be to learn as much about the project and the people they hope to serve and start TELLING THE STORY.

The content promoting this might include interviews with the youth as they prepare for the trip. They might be asked questions about their expectations, what they hope to accomplish. Church A might post two or three short videos with youth answers. Church B might do the same thing.

Then Church A links to Church B and vice versa.  (Add Churches C, D, E, etc.)

Why go to this trouble?

Because more gives a fuller picture, more is more interesting and more interaction attracts search engines—for everyone!

There will be a temptation to not do this, hoping that by telling just your congregation’s story, you’ll encourage anyone inclined to click a donate button and that contribution will come to your congregation.

That narrow view will cause you to miss out on the evangelism potential of the moment.

Here’s what could happen.

Members of Church A—beginning with the youth themselves—are loyal and check the web site to see their youth talk about the upcoming trip. They end up clicking the links to Church B and Church C. Connections have been made between the parishes. They are starting to know one another.

Members of Church A and Church B share the link to family and friends. Some of them send donations. They share the link, too.

Meanwhile, the local friends of the youth have checked up on them. They become interested and ask to come along. The youth group grows!

Meanwhile, the Indian youth in South Dakota see the videos. They comment and send a welcome message or make their own video and direct it to the youth they are looking forward to meeting in a few months. Dialog between the youth starts. When they eventually meet, they already know one another.

Meanwhile, a local church from a poorer neighborhood sees what the  youth in richer congregations are doing. They lament that their youth could never afford to go on a trip like that. They’d have to raise funds in a neighborhood with little to give. One enterprising mother decides their kids are not going to be left out. She contacts the churches that are having fundraisers and makes arrangements for several of the youth from their church to help with the fundraising efforts so they would have the experience of initiating a mission effort instead of being the recipients of mission efforts. This is life-changing for the young people in both congregations.

Also meanwhile, a youth group in Texas has happened upon the videos. They visited the Indian Reservation a few years ago and recognize some of the Indian youth who have commented. They invite people to come to Texas next summer to help with an outreach ministry in Hispanic neighborhoods.

Meanwhile, meanwhile, meanwhile — there’s no limit on parallel interactions.

This is the tip of the mission iceberg. Maybe no one clicked the donate button and your congregation lost $20. The value of the interconnectedness paid off in far greater ways.

How can your congregation become a C to C church?

Teaching the Transfiguration through Art

The Transfiguration is one of those church commemorations that never really resonates. It is hard for us earthbound mortals to envision and connect with the story.

Yet it remains a popular subject with artists. Reviewing some art of the transfiguration might be helpful.

TransfigurationArtHere are four renditions. Some artists attempt a realistic portrayal. Others stick with stylistic or representational. Titian tries to draw us in as if we are standing behind the disciples or perhaps hiding behind a rock! Notice in the stylistic representation how the shaft of light pierces each of the disciples.

The common elements are the six figures. Christ is central. Moses and Elijah flank Christ. Sometimes you will see a personification of God hovering over Christ’s head.

TransfigurationArt2

In this icon it is interesting that the artist depicts an elderly Elijah and a youthful Moses. Their heavenly form preserves them at their most memorable.

The three disciples are usually depicted in various states of awe. James and John are usually stunned speechless. Peter is trying to be part of the moment.

For teaching purpose, the painting below by Giovanni Battista Moroni is very forthright in representation. When it came to religious paintings, this 16th century portrait artist was considered a bit ordinary. But his ordinary depiction has the elements of the story.

Giovanni-Battista-Moroni-xx-The-Transfiguration-1

The disciples awake to find Jesus having a chat with Elijah and Moses. They are discussing heavenly plans. It’s a strategy session. Fortunately, Moses brought the Law with him and Elijah brought his prophecies. What is about to unfold must agree with the law and prophets! Everybody on the same page!

There are the clouds and the bright lights and white raiment. They are clearly on top of a mountain, feet on solid ground. Peter is bold enough to address Jesus and the patriarchs. “Lucky you brought us along. We can build you each a shelter.” The gesture says it all! James and John are overwhelmed. You can almost hear the voice of God coming from that break in the clouds.

Transfiguration2003-3But there is also something for our modern eyes to contemplate in this fifth, more modern depiction. The three earthly figures are dwarfed by the experience.