The poll asks one question and gives three answer options.
Here is the current result. You can go to lutherancentral.com and add your vote if you like.
In your opinion, what is the top issue Lutherans should be addressing
Electing more outward & future focused leaders for senior district and/or national level positions
Focus on discipleship of members to serve, lead and evangelize (the leading answer)
More focus on social media & better communication across generations & communities
I voted for number three—more focus on social media. I don’t think it is the most important necessarily, but it is the only practical way to achieve the first two options and is therefore the best answer.
OPTION ONE-22%
Electing more outward & future focused leaders for senior district and/or national level positions
Lutherans have a very difficult time identifying talent. Present-day hierarchical leanings make the talent pool difficult to replenish. You don’t get elected to high office in the church without meeting the approval of those already in office. Those in power tend to surround themselves with those who support their ideas. In a church craving diversity and innovation, you end up with more of same—even when diverse and innovative ideas are at hand.
This creates a powerless church. The only ones with power are self-absorbed.
OPTION TWO-55%
Focus on discipleship of members to serve, lead and evangelize
This is a crying need, for sure. It is almost impossible to meet without the leadership of independent thinkers. So, OPTION TWO depends on OPTION ONE.
It would be interesting to know the demographics of Lutheran Central readers. It is likely to be highly read by professional leaders. If so, are the voters really interested in empowering the laity or are they looking for more help? It is interesting that this is the most popular choice—and probably the easiest to achieve. Just do it!
There is probably a difference in lay discernment of their talents and potential contributions and what professional leaders expect.
Both OPTION ONE and OPTION TWO can be achieved with OPTION THREE.
OPTION THREE-23%
More focus on social media & better communication across generations & communities
The Church is pitifully behind in adopting modern media. It may be that leaders don’t know how to use it and are afraid to hand the reins to laity, who use it in every aspect of their lives every day.
Clergy are way behind leaders in other professions. In business, medicine, education, entertainment, and government, leaders are finding new ways to reach and expand their audiences. In the Church, we are still using the pulpit and newsletters posted as PDFs on static church websites.
Social Media scares the socks and stockings off church leaders. It empowers laity. It gives new ideas platforms. One person with a new idea must no longer spend years climbing the toady ladder to be heard.
Church leaders have nothing to worry about. Almost no churches use Social Media with any kind of mission strategy in mind. Most church leaders are busy figuring out where the next good leaders wiil come from and how to get laity to work harder.
There is always the temptation to worship at the altar of big. We all know the big churches in our regions—those flagship congregations that can afford their own picnic grove, gymnasium, sound systems, organs with banks of pipes, air conditioning, three or four pastors and a half dozen support staff. They need tons of people to support this lifestyle. That’s why there are so few large churches!
Regional offices love them, however. It makes them feel successful. They count on a few thousand dollars a month in support from them. Pastors compete for calls to serve them. They become the stepping stones for professional leaders who want to climb the church ladder.
The problem? They reach comparatively few people. Most people belong to small churches with fewer than 300 members.
Large churches grew out of post-war franchise thinking. Before there was a MacDonald’s in every town with a population of 10,000, there was the local hamburger joint or soda counter. That’s where you went for memorable dates or to hangout for hours long after a waiter carried your plate away. That’s where you knew the owner and staff by name. And they knew you, too. And your family.
Hey, let’s centralize our services. We’ll build big churches with bigger parking lots in the suburbs. People will flock to the big churches. We’ll let the little churches die and focus on getting bigger. It will provide more money for mission! That’s our job, right?
So how come there is less money for mission these days? How come the regional bodies are starving for support?
Franchises run on efficiency. You can serve more for less. Most management decisions are already made for you by the franchise owner. The decor. The menu. The salary structure. The hours.
Profit is the goal. Profit is made when people keep moving and present no challenges. Franchise operators don’t need to be leaders. They just need to perform. And customers? There is no expectation of customers beyond stuffing their paper plates in a trash can before they leave. They’ll return to the nearest franchise (it won’t matter which one) the next time they need quick satisfaction for their hunger—not unlike Christmas and Easter Christians.
Church leaders are attracted to franchise thinking. They see themselves as managers. That’s what managers do. They make the bottom line work — for them! The liturgy, the music, the bulletins, worship times, the robes—they’ll be the same. So will the mission opportunities. Streamlined. Efficient.
Franchise mentality only works to a point in church work. We are not selling hamburgers. We are trying to reach people.
People present challenges.
That’s why small churches work. People don’t mind being part of a franchise’s profit base when all they want is a burger with fries, and their need can be satisfied with a $5 bill.
Some problems are harder to solve. People may:
Be sick or dying.
Be addicted or poor.
Be confused.
Feel broken, lonely or inadequate.
Feel guilty.
Long for fulfillment or expression.
Want to know the people around them and see them again.
Remember sitting and singing with mom and dad or grandmom and granddad.
Want their children to be nurtured with good food or sound thinking.
Need a friend.
Want more from a staff than an upsale and a stack of napkins.
That’s when they turn to the neighborhood church.
The efficient, centralized church 15 miles away will not attract them. If that is the only option, they’ll look elsewhere to satisfy their needs. It probably won’t be in church.
In the end, they won’t care how many staff there are or about the organ or air-conditioning.
They just want to feel better. They want to know that God, the great franchise owner, cares about them.
What if the Church didn’t have 2000 years of history built on top of another few thousand years of tradition?
What if the Church had never spent the Middle Ages entrenched in monastic thinking, building cathedrals and chapels in every hamlet?
What if our ways of worship had never been written down—lost like the tunes that went with David’s psalms? What if the organ had never been invented?
What if the New World had never been discovered and there had been no outpost for the revolutionary religious thinkers of the 17th century to go?
What if we just decided to start over?
Redefining Church
So much of what the church is was carved in stone long, long ago.
The current decline of the church is a failure to adapt. We may think new thoughts but they get stuck in the web of tradition.
The only nod to modernity in the Church is music. It is a little odd to attend “contemporary” worship led by pastors wearing several layers of Medieval robes. The jive of the modern music is lost in absurdity.
There are so many spheres where Church needs a fresh look.
Updates are needed in:
Architecture
Education
Worship
Witness
Mission
and most important, perhaps
Economics
Let’s start there.
Church Economics: A Fight for Survival
The modern Church is failing because the economics no longer work. Life in ministry as we once knew it is no longer sustainable.
Yet the economic structure of the Church is held in a fortress protected by those who consume Church wealth—not lavishly but expensively.
Therein lies a great dichotomy.
Our projected image divides our budgets like this.
All the talk is about mission.
We write mission statements. We do not budget for mission. Most church mission efforts revolve around volunteer effort.
The typical congregational budget looks more like this.
The bulk of church offerings go to sustaining buildings and church professional workers—just sustaining them. In theory, we are using these assets for mission. Statistics show that we are not doing this effectively.
If the Church were a business, it would undergo an emergency restructuring. The best leadership talent would be sought. No expense would be spared in implementing a new financial plan. Staff would be retrained. What isn’t working would be history.
But the Church doesn’t work that way. We work with what we have. We have tradition. At least for now.
In tough economic times, fewer resources go to mission. Those already in the church accept this. We love our buildings. We love our pastors. We are willing to keep filling the pot to sustain what we love.
The structure of Church requires that leadership come from a very shallow clergy pool whose primary training is not innovative management. Most clergy go into ministry to follow tradition—not lead. If they enter the ministry as young movers and shakers, they won’t last long! They will hit the long black wall.
But new people—the people for whom Church exists according to most mission statements—see a disconnect between what the church preaches and how the church prioritizes its assets and behavior.
They can’t justify the vast expense on things that aren’t working. They are not part of the failing tradition and we give them no incentive to join.
If the Chuch is to survive it cannot be the Church as we know it. Change will be painful because the change must be structural —starting with the top—where the dependence on the past is most deeply entrenched.
It is also where change is least likely to happen.
Church structure guarantees that.
Unless laity start to demand that their offerings be put to better use.
Part of church structure keeps the voice of laity silent.
A New Church Tape Measure
How Do We Measure Ministry?
The Old List of Statistics
One of the churches I grew up in had an usher/greeter stationed at the door to the sanctuary. With his right hand he shook the hand of each congregant as he or she entered the door. Behind his back, in his left hand, was a counter. He’d tap the button and tally the attendance. Most people had no idea they were a walk-in statistic.
In the same church in the hymnal rack were communion cards. Congregants taking a place at the communion table would drop proof of their presence in the offering plate. These would be forwarded to the church secretary who kept a big book with the name of each church member and their communion history.
A third measure is offering history kept as much for tax purposes as pledge purposes.
The church governing board will keep track of the income and expenses and asset values. At the end of the year, all of this valuable information will be forwarded to the denominational headquarters.
The problem is that this information is helpful mostly to professional leaders, specifically those considering a call. Does this congregation have enough money and a support base to afford pastoral services? is the question on their minds.
We are measuring these things out of tradition based on what was practical to measure in years past. A person sitting in the sanctuary is easily counted. A dollar placed in the offering plate can be added to the other dollars and counted.
Little of this information is of use to mission planning. It was probably NEVER a measure of true viability.
In Search of More Useful Statistics
If growth and mission are goals, the Church needs to start measuring things that matter—things that were impossible to measure years ago.
It is a new world. There are many ways to measure statistics that are far more helpful to mission planning. The more detail you have, the clearer your mission plan will be.
Here are statistics that are more important to mission and church growth.
Participation in church activities How many attend every niche activity? How many youth take part in youth groups? How many children are in the nursery school? How many helped with the walkathon or mission project? How many attend midweek services or socials?
Where people come from Many churches keep statistics on race. They do this a bit apologetically. It’s to measure their progress in fostering diversity, they’ll say. This is not a statistic that really matters. What matters is how do people learn about your church? What is their entry point? Was it a program? Was it through a network of friends or acquaintances? Did they learn about you on your website? Did they read about your project in the news? This type of information tells you which evangelism efforts are effective.
Age demographics This information helps you plan a bigger picture. If your congregation is aging, you are going to need to find a way to reach younger demographics. If you are attracting unaccompanied children (common in urban neighborhood churches) you’ll need to plan supervision for their nurturing and involvement, especially reaching the adults in their lives.
Membership cycle We are borrowing a concept from marketing. Businesses track how long it takes a person who expresses interest in a service or project to actually make a purchase? It is called the “sales cycle” and is often depicted as a funnel. You place all your prospective customers at the top and widest part of the funnel. Then you track their engagement as they filter through the ever-narrowing channel that leads to their conversion. If they drop out of the funnel before reaching the bottom, sales people want to know why. At the bottom of the funnel are the prospects who actually buy and hopefully form a brand loyalty. It’s called conversion. Conversion: one of those marketing words that evangelists share!
The same process is vital to successful mission. How long does it take a visitor to your church to become engaged and join? What happened on their journey through the “membership funnel”? Why did some drop out? At what point did they lose interest? How can you improve the experience for other visitors?
Ongoing engagement or member retention It is not unusual for an excited new church member to suddenly disappear or slowly become less engaged. Often, they don’t quit or transfer; they just stop showing up. Do you have a way of tracking this and addressing any problems. Their waning engagement could be demands or problems in their personal life—or they might have felt snubbed. If you don’t know, you can’t help them—and that’s the ongoing part of mission.
Member interests, problems and goals The church has a tendency to pigeon-hole members. We encourage youth, but once you reach maturity, you are what you are. This has changed. We have reached an age of life-long learning. People are expected to retrain constantly. They are not going to feel comfortable participating in the world of church if they cannot grow. Churches must know member interests and provide channels to nurture and use new skills.
Engagement outside of Sunday morning Today’s culture makes it impossible for some to attend church on Sunday morning. Some spiritual people have no interest in Sunday morning worship. They may still consider themselves loyal members, and they may have valuable skills that you need.
How can churches measure all of this?
It’s easier than it might seem.
A church BLOG provides these statistics—all built into the software. It takes some skill to offer the kinds of content that promote engagement that will give the best results, but within a year or two you’ll have a new picture of your congregation that will help you plan and carry out your mission.
You’ll be able to count views.
You’ll be able to see what pages attract the most interest.
You’ll be able to track whether they reached you through Facebook or what words they plugged into their search engine to find you.
You’ll be able to communicate directly with anyone who subscribes.
You’ll be able to see which days of the week and hours of the day get the most traffic. No need to schedule everything on Sunday morning.
You’ll get an idea of where people are from. It might surprise you to find that you might be engaging with people all over the world.
You’ll be able to track when people unsubscribe and that information can influence your mission.
You’ll be able to see skills and interests in profiles which they choose to make available online.
You’ll be able to plan educational offerings that connect with your readers.
You’ll be giving them a safe place to explore their relationship with God and his people.
If a congregation tracks these kinds of things and looks at weekly progress, they will be less likely to wallow in the status quo.
In addition, the blog is living evidence of your commitment to your community. You have a platform that is not defined by your church walls. You can use that platform to address neighborhood interests. You are no longer waiting for people to come to you; you are going to them. It’s the kind of social proof that younger generations expect.
The sample scenario has a senior pastor fretting over a member of a team—a troublesome lay member, of course. A woman, naturally. You know how church women can be.
The article has the senior pastor as the sole determiner of this staff person’s value. In the Lutheran church, the congregation council would be making this determination.
There are very few churches in America large enough to have a team. Most congregational leadership teams are a pastor and a loyal group of volunteer lay leaders. Too bad. Can’t fire a volunteer!
Regardless, let’s look at Beaumont’s list of factors to consider. Note how they also might apply to congregations dealing with pastoral leadership.
Her keys points, shortened and rephrased:
It’s someone else’s job to care for the emotional needs of the targeted staff person.
The pastor as team leader cannot be both caretaker and supervisor. The roles must be separate.
The payroll dollars of the church must be for mission and not for preservation of employee needs.
The personal needs of the employee cannot trump the collective needs of the team.
The readiness of the employee for firing is not relevant.
It is not your job as the “firer” to be liked.
No employee can serve well amidst conflict and anxiety. You are doing them a favor to help them move on.
These points are well taken.
Now let’s look at how they might apply to congregations and pastors.
Pastors are called and there is a tangle of red tape and polity traditions governing their comings and goings. In some denominations, the people paying the bills have no say whatsoever. Other denominations give the congregation this responsibility, usually through some sort of governing board. They have the responsibility for ensuring mission but often without any real control over professional leadership.
In the performance of their duties as a church board, they will face a sort of pastors’ “union.” It is formidable.
Clergy control church media and structure. If a dispute develops, congregations have no platform to present their case. Clergy have an ongoing relationship with church leaders and a platform for their causes. Gossip will reign. For decades. Or longer.
Church structure doesn’t like to admit that pastors can:
be difficult.
be ineffective in mission.
create tension and poor working conditions among the team.
rally personal sympathy and support within the congregation and cause division.
emphasize their comfort, emotional needs, and professional needs over the combined mission of the church
Lay leaders have the responsibility for the parish. They will live with the consequences as pastors come and go.
They should be able to follow the advice of Susan Beaumont. They should put mission and the health and spirit of the team (congregation) first. As Christians they should feel concern for church leaders but not make their emotional or professional needs the focus of their ministry. They should be able to make unpopular decisions.
But often congregations are required to protect their relationship with pastor above all else. Likability is more important than performance.
As long as there are no moral issues, the pastor’s role is protected. Congregations can wither for years under the same pastoral leadership. Everybody likes everybody. No change will be sought (and no change will result).
Decline is accepted—even expected. All congregational reserves will be spent on a relationship that is pleasant but unproductive before change is considered. Then, it is too late.
Pastors will not want to serve a congregation without a well-filled coffer.
So what’s happening to the laity while everyone is happy?
Talented members leave with a sense of futility.
As things decline, murmurs of discontent start. Finger-pointing isn’t far behind
People stop coming because of the atmosphere. They may not be able to put a finger on it, but things just don’t seem right. This will be interpreted by clergy as a “change in demographics.”
Lay people who feel a responsibility for the future of the church are labeled as troublemakers. They may even be discouraged from leadership—seen as a threat to clergy.
The pastor will seek solace among the clergy. The denominational rumor mill is primed. Laity will be unaware that they are grist.
Should ministry fail, it’s the fault of the laity.
Last night PBS’s American Experience aired a documentary on the Amish, focusing on the practice of shunning.
Shunning is the intentional culling of wayward members of a group. It isolates the wrong-doer, marks them within the community. It is a jail without bars.
Amish culture focuses on church as community and as community as the guiding influence in life.
My family has always lived close to the Amish. In fact, my ancestors arrived in Pennsylvania in the early 1700s at the same time as the Amish. They, too, were from Switzerland. They, too, were seeking religious freedom in the wide wake of the Reformation.
They made their way from the Swiss Alps to the sea and left the Netherlands on the same ship with Amish immigrants. They soon had second thoughts about spending weeks crossing the Atlantic with the people they saw as rigid. They disembarked when the ship stopped in England and waited for another passage.
Then they settled the same counties in William Penn’s colony—Lebanon, Lancaster, Dauphin and York.
The Pennsylvania Dutch come as “plain” or “fancy.” We were the “fancy”—although not very. Buttons were permitted, hex signs might grace a barn. and refrigerators and telephones seemed like a good idea. My grandfather spoke Pennsylvania Dutch although his voice was silenced before I ever heard it.
Pennsylvania is a fascinating place, religiously. Penn’s experiment lives to this day. Amish live next to Lutherans and Methodists. Methodists live among Quakers, Catholics. and Orthodox. The interwoven fabric of faith extends to include the Jewish and Muslims and in recent years Buddhists and Hindu. Jewish and Lutheran children attend Quaker schools. The local Chinese restaurant had a Christmas tree next to their Buddhist shrine.
Bill of Rights: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
We believe that. The problem is that recently this has been interpreted by courts as being unable to uphold the laws that established religions have made for themselves and that creates a lawless mess among the faithful. It opens the door to religious bullying. Yes, the First Amendment protects religious bullies!
And so, this documentary on shunning is interesting.
Redeemer has been shunned—the Lutheran way— excluded from participation by decree. It’s not supposed to be possible under Lutheran law but . . .
We’ve lived in exile for five years. The purpose of all shunning (and bullying) is to isolate the victim. Isolation creates desperation. It strips the victims of influence and power. It gnaws at self-esteem and confidence. It devours energy and resources.
For those who can withstand the cruelty, it sets us free.
Shunning pits the power of the individual against that of community. Lutherans theoretically believe in the power of the individual. We call it interdependence. The strength of the individual makes the whole strong.
Sometimes an individual accepted within community (leaders) can use the power of community as a weapon. Isolation and shunning is a number one tool.
Individual thinking is a threat.
Having experienced Lutheran shunning, we know it is scary. Both Lutheran and Amish shunning exist to protect the past. The Amish are more forthright. They call it what it is and don’t pretend to be sugary and sweet about it. It is ugly business.
We bear the condescending looks of clergy.
We’ve been invited “to the table” by people who clearly are glad to see us leave.
We’ve been threatened with lawsuits (something the Amish don’t do to one another).
We’ve had story after story, lie after lie, told without anyone questioning the teller.
We’ve heard scripture taught but not applied.
We’ve been the topic of Lutheran derision for years.
We feel that we have a role to play in the denomination of our heritage. We move on with our ministry as we are declared non-existent by Lutheran know-it-alls. The “things” that were ours our stripped, divided, and sold as if we were dead. We are still alive, well, and watching.
It makes us think about the role of the gifts of an individual within community.
Must the talents bestowed by God upon the individual all be directed toward the preservation of social order?
If God makes you a chemical engineer, must you spend your life behind the plow?
If God gives you the gift of discernment, must you submit to the discernment of less gifted but more powerful? Lutherans didn’t use to believe in intellectual submission. Things seemed to have changed.
Most of the interviews in this documentary were with Amish who left the order. Each witness spoke through pain. They left without farewells. Shunning was invoked quickly. Return under any conditions but those of the community was made difficult if not impossible.
Families who sought reconciliation were forced to do so behind locked doors and dimmed lights—secret from the community.
This is the fascinating part of the Amish story.
Among the shunned Amish interviewees, there was no condemnation of the Amish way of life, just sorrow that they no longer fit in. They felt loss. They followed their individual “callings” despite hardship and communal condemnation.
They did not leave their heritage behind. They did what they had to in order to pursue their calling without extravagance.
One young woman took up nursing and started a fund to help other Amish pursue education. Several set up halfway houses to shelter and guide Amish runaways.
The power of the individual is extending the Amish community, whether the leaders approve or not.
There is always a temptation among the religious to look down upon the different. That’s a big part of religious tradition.
It’s also a major roadblock to moving ahead. Lutherans decided long ago—when they jumped ship in England in our family’s case—that they wanted to witness their faith within society. We want to rub shoulders with all God’s family.
Amish take shunning seriously. It is not widely discussed. It’s hard for everyone.
Shunning is so against Lutheran teaching that convoluted ways must be found to justify it. Myths arise to justify the ill treatment of loyal members who have erred only in daring to disagree with the status quo. Lutheran leaders don smug expressions and shun with a smile (or a sneer). It all hides this fact: When Lutherans practice shunning, we violate the tenets of our faith and polity.
Redeemer is still Lutheran. We didn’t leave the order. We are locked out.
The Bible is full of stories. Jesus understood the value of a good story more than anyone!
There is a resurgence in the interest of good story-telling. Marketers talk about it all the time, but it is rarely discussed in congregational circles and few congregations understand that good story-telling is also at the heart of evangelism.
Here is a link to a blog written by a rabbi known for his consulting with Jewish congregations. They are struggling with the same challenges as we Christians. We can learn from one another.
Rabbi Hayem Herring features a guest blogger well-versed in marketing.
We see congregations ill-equipped to share their stories. They may be great at re-telling the biblical stories. They may be spectacular at interpreting the biblical stories. But when it comes to telling their own story, they don’t know where to begin.
Problem 1:
Congregations rely on the pastor as storyteller and the pastor often does not know the congregation’s story nearly as well as the congregants.
Problem 2:
Parishioners rarely have the platform to tell their story. Some are natural networkers and could do a great job, but they have not been encouraged.
Problem 3:
Congregations confuse history with “their story.” They can point you to the website or a memorial booklet published at a key anniversary. These invariably recite key pastorates and building projects and organ renovations. These aren’t the type of stories that interest newcomers. The how and why of these stories — the stuff that interests people — are lost in the recitation of names and dates.
A congregation’s story isn’t all about the past. Your story is being written every day. You have an opportunity to tell it every time your congregation adopts a cause, reaches a new demographic, accepts a new member, sponsors a student, conducts a mission project or addresses a community concern.
Every congregation has a great story with a plot populated with colorful characters—some from the past, some still with us. Your members can tell you why their church is important. They can tell you what sets your congregation apart. They can tell you the congregation’s strengths and passion. They can see into the future.
But they are rarely asked.
Congregations need to hone the story-telling skills of leaders and members alike. We need to encourage our members to tell their story in any way that is comfortable for them. There should be little attempt to sensor or edit their stories. They must be genuine.
Allow your members to witness, write a blog post, speak before the next potluck dinner. Write letters to the editor of the local paper. Encourage them to tell their story on their personal social media pages.
Remember the past. Celebrate the current. Show the neighborhood that you are interested in the problems of the community. Talk about moving into the future.
People will notice. You’ll be seen as vibrant no matter how large or small you might be.
How Will the Church Cope in a World with No Boundaries?
Today’s Alban Weekly post points to a major challenge in the church. Rev. Adam Walker Cleaveland gives advice to pastors on how to manage their social media presence when they move from one parish to another.
What will pastors do with all their social media connections when they move from one parish to another?
Well, most of them aren’t very active online, but perhaps that will change.
You’d think the answer might be simple. They do what we all do when we move. Make new friends. Keep the old. Check in at Christmastime.
The few laity who happen across this article might be truly puzzled. They might be surprised to learn that pastors are actually taught to cut off relationships and ties to their past. Be hard-nosed about it. Do not make friends within your parish. Do not communicate with them when you leave. Make a clean break. That relationship you thought you had—it was all business.
Perhaps this is why church leaders so easily advise congregations to grieve and move on when they want to close churches. They have been taught an inhumane approach to ministry.
The practice comes from a day when pastoring was a family business. The spouse (wife) and children were part of parish culture and would follow the pastor (dad) wherever he went. The kids would change schools. The wife would clean and decorate the new parsonage and start attending women’s meetings.
The Church has always been asking for the impossible. The practice has caused more hardship—cruel hardship—than it will ever admit. But it is “the way” of the church—opposite in many ways to what the Church teaches.
But now it is a “way” that is no longer possible. The spouse works (husband or wife). The kids are going to stay connected whether or not the move disrupts their friendships. They didn’t attend those seminary classes that taught the church social order. They are not obligated to take orders.
The practice attempts to make life easier for the next pastor. That’s church culture. The pastor must be able to stand in the pulpit and look across a totally compliant and mindlessly happy congregation. When trouble breaks a congregant’s bubble, he or she must know who to call. No options.
Oh, and that trouble can never involve the pastor.
That’s the system. Like it or leave it.
A lot of people are leaving it!
The view is insulting to laity. We are not putty in pastoral hands, waiting for the next shepherd to dote upon our every need. There is trust and a regard, but not a total dependency.
This view fuels church conflict. When disagreements arise, the pastors must hang on to authority at every cost. It is the laity’s role to “give.”
Pastoral relationships often depend on dependency.
Dependency depends upon weakness.
And so the Church as an influence in our culture grows weaker.
Here in Southeast Pennsylvania in the ELCA, we’ve seen our entire denomination fostering dependence. We come from a tradition that honors the contributions of both laity and clergy as equals. That’s the theory anyway.
Reality: Congregations are expected to comply with synodical wishes. If they don’t, the laity are labeled. Disrespectful. Adversarial. Resistant. We need only question. We don’t even have to disagree!
This synodical view is bound to trickle down. If a bishop expects compliance, so too can a pastor.
All these decades or centuries of fostering dependent relationships are now rising up, gathering the force of a tsunami.
The tsunami called Social Media.
Pastor Cleaveland admits that Social Media is not a fad. It must be reckoned with. In typical pastoral thinking, he gives a “to do” list to keep things “under control.”
Odd. The power of Social Media to influence and expand the work of the church is enormous, and pastors focus on how it affects THEM.
Break your Social Media connections into lists that you can control.
Be sparing about your “likes.” Make sure there is a way for to disconnect from the people you were once eager to please. Find a gentle way to “unfriend” them. (The dangers of the “like” culture of social media are why we recommend blogging to Facebook, etc., by the way.)
Remember, this is for their own good. You are helping them grieve the loss of your influence in their lives.
Narcissistic? Just a little!
Really, pastors. It is quite simple to explain to your parish that you love them and will always love them. If there were problems, apologize. Mean it. Tell them that you will check into the church website from time to time. Let it go at that.
Don’t tell them that the reason you don’t “like” them anymore is because you are being paid to “like” someone else now.
All those needy people you are leaving behind will find others to love them and to love. It may be the new pastor. It may not! You won’t be able to control that.
Love is like that. You can’t corral it as much as the Church might try.
Why Congregations Simply MUST Embrace Social Media
Why use Social Media to further the work of the church?
The answer is easy.
Congregations that ignore the internet will soon be out of business. They may linger for a few years, growing less effective and more frustrated. They will wonder what they are doing wrong. It will be a painful process of attrition.
Many churches will never again be able to minister the way they once did.
The Old Evangelism
Old evangelism techniques center on creating an entry point. This becomes more challenging as congregations work to bolster their self-image.
Old Evangelism relies on seekers walking through the church doors. The sanctuary is like a big mouse trap. Lure people in. Close the door. Snap ’em with the Word.
Often, there is no plan beyond creating an entry opportunity.
These are the five most popular entry strategies.
Preschool programs.
Family ministry.
Music ministry.
A culture centered on a charismatic pastor.
A ministry centered on a popular social concern.
Pre-schools
Church schools today tend to attract only the very young. By the time children are 10 years old, churches don’t know what to do with them. Volunteers who are comfortable working with older children are harder to find. Churches that have a pre-school program often see little benefit. They can’t afford the next step—family ministry.
Family Ministries
Congregations hire professionals to lead a family-oriented ministry. Typically churches with family ministries hire a Christian education director, a youth leader, a music leader, and accompanists to work with several choirs or bands. This means doubling or tripling the annual budget and is financially impossible for many congregations.
Consequently, the pre-school fills a fleeting family need. If there is no place for them to grow as needs change, they move on. In urban areas, families tend to relocate when their oldest children reach the age of five. Family ministries are often seen in the suburbs.
Music Ministries
Music ministries are also expensive and are growing less effective with the segmentation of society. It is a daunting task to provide the breadth of music that will appeal to an entire community with ever-changing demographics.
Many churches advertise “contemporary” worship. What does that mean? There are dozens of contemporary styles of music.
The talent needed for an effective music ministry may be more expensive than hiring clergy. (We can’t have that!)
Professional Leadership
That brings us to the charismatic pastor—a growing rarity. The average age of seminarians is on the rise. People are entering ministry as a second or third career. There is no time to hone the social skills and demonstrate the commitment to community required if congregations hope to center evangelism efforts on the likability and long-term service of a pastor.
Part of the overlooked demographics of church life is the aging of clergy. Second career clergy have different needs. Their families are settled. They are less flexible. They may be planning only 15 years of service! This often results in commuter and part-time pastors who are never active in the community they visit on Sunday mornings.
Congregations cannot count on pastors as evangelists. The pool of candidates with these skills is very shallow.
Ministries that Focus on Social Concern
Ministries centering on social concerns require visionary leadership. Hard to come by. Hard to sustain.
They may attract the passionate. They may also turn off those who disagree with the cause. This type of ministry has its place but is risky. It takes time to nurture the atmosphere that allows for success.
Make Room for New Evangelism
The old evangelism methods which center on getting people to walk through your door are going the way of door-to-door sales.
But don’t hand out the tissues just yet.
Social Media opens new doors. A congregation can reach people 24/7 and address a multitude of spiritual concerns without hiring a staff to oversee the effort and without sending the sexton to unlock the doors.
2×2 Marks Three Years in Social Media Ministry
2×2, an outreach ministry of Redeemer Lutheran Church, launched on February 2, 2011. Groundhog’s Day.
2×2 is Redeemer’s response to hierarchy determining for us that we had no ability to be a church anymore. SEPA Synod locked us out of our building in 2009.
Redeemer responded by pioneering modern evangelism techniques. We used the name 2×2 because we wanted our ministry to grow beyond our community presence.
Jesus sent the disciples out 2×2. Perfect.
We had no pastor, no Christian education director, no music professionals. Our property, which included our school, was taken from us. Many of our growing membership were frightened by the law suits and rightfully so. It has been vicious! We still had the passion of about a dozen members. That was good enough for Jesus!
As part of our ministry we visit other churches in our region. What an eye-opener!
Many churches are struggling to solve the same problems. We hear talk of innovation. We see very little change. Old evangelism techniques are employed with fewer and fewer people to implement them. Failure is almost expected.
We read dozens of church websites. Most are nothing but online bulletin boards for people who are already familiar with the church. Few church websites are used for evangelism or education.
Redeemer’s online ministry is, by necessity, different. We had no place to invite anyone to come.
It took a while to gain traction. See for yourself. We could have quit after the first four months. Four months and only 106 readers! That’s only six in attendance every week! Hurry! Close that failing church! Seize those assets! Do everyone a favor. Force them out!
Screen Capture early on January 30, 2014. The green boxes show the highest statistics to date.
We stuck with it.
Our ministry has tripled in size every year. This month, January 2014, we will have reached more than 6000 new readers with 2×2’s blog. (Still two days to go in January!) About 100 more subscribe to our blog through Facebook, LinkedIn and other channels. That adds another 3000 per month.
There are anywhere from 10-50 people reading our website at any given hour.
We are on track to reach 100,000 readers this year. That’s only the first tier of our social reach. The resources people are downloading will reach thousands more.
We used no ads, no Facebook Like campaigns, no contests or gimmicks to build readership. We simply post quality, thought-provoking, and useful content several times each week—not just on Sundays.
We now reach more people than any other church in the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod. Our reach is probably wider than any other church in the ELCA (which refuses to recognize us).
An overlooked benefit of using Social Media is that it will direct ministry. The data collected highlights needs and opportunities that otherwise leave congregational leaders guessing.
Our search statistics showed that people were looking for resources to teach adults. This led us to our weekly Adult Object Lesson and our weekly Lectionary Slideshow.
Missing from our experiment is how we might be using our reach to influence our local community and how we might be teaching other churches what we have learned.
Redeemer is not closed.
We are locked out of God’s House
by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod
of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
Two recent experiences point to some attitudes that might help us understand a congregation struggling in mission.
Both involve the food service business.
What is the common mission of all eateries?
To serve food that delights and that invites return visits.
Experience 1
It was the last shopping day before Christmas. Our family had already gathered for a visit with distant relatives. Before we split up again to visit other relatives we decided to take a little shopping trip together. Satisfied, we put our purchases in the trunk of the car and decided to visit the local yogurt store before heading different directions.
We navigated to the yogurt shop (part of a franchise), braving a good amount of mall traffic to do so. We parked and went to the door. The lights were on. Two uniformed workers were behind the counter. We tried the door. It was locked. We looked for posted hours. There were none. It was almost noon. Surely this was close to opening. We made brief eye contact. We just wanted to know if they were opening soon. But the employees busied themselves and did not look again toward the door.
Five immediate sales down the drain. Who knows how many potential sales!
Experience 2
Two of us were strolling the streets of a small town business district that was trying to revive. We stopped to peek in the window of a restaurant that had hours posted. It was their custom to close for a couple of hours between lunch and dinner. We were about 30 minutes early for their second seating. We enjoyed reading the menu and considered coming back. As we walked away, a waiter called after us. “We are not quite ready for our evening guests, but if you’d like to come in, we will seat you and bring you a glass of wine on the house.”
We turned back and enjoyed one of the best dining experiences we ever had. In fact, after nearly two hours of fine dining, during which the other tables gradually filled, the restaurant owner came out, greeted us, and answered our questions about their restaurant and the town.
Questions
Which of these understood their organization’s true mission?
Which operated as if the “boss” was watching?
How did one organization empower employees to feel able to stretch the rules?
What parallels can you find in how congregations and denominations conduct mission?
Join Bishop Ruby Kinisa as she visits small churches "under cover" to learn what people would never share if they knew they were talking to their bishop.
Undercover Bishop will always be available in PDF form on 2x2virtualchurch.com for FREE.
Print or Kindle copies are available on Amazon.com.
For bulk copies, please contact 2x2: creation@dca.net.
Contact Info
You can reach
Judy Gotwald,
the moderator of 2x2,
at
creation@dca.net
or 215 605 8774
Redeemer’s Prayer
We were all once strangers, the weakest, the outcasts, until someone came to our defense, included us, empowered us, reconciled us (1 Cor. 2; Eph. 2).
2×2 Sections
Where in the World is 2×2?
On Isaiah 30:15b
Be calm. Wait. Wait. Commit your cause to God. He will make it succeed. Look for Him a little at a time. Wait. Wait. But since this waiting seems long to the flesh and appears like death, the flesh always wavers. But keep faith. Patience will overcome wickedness.
—Martin Luther
![pyramid]2](http://2x2virtualchurch.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/pyramid2.jpg)
