Most small congregations function with solo pastors. Solo pastors must be evangelists.

But some solo pastors rely on miraculous intervention for church growth. Denominations even have a term for this ministry style—caretaker ministries. Caretaker ministries are a terrible idea! They are an insult to mission of the church. In addition, they are at the heart of much church conflict.

The problem: congregations are not in on the “caretaker” secret. Lay people think they have called a pastor equipped to help with all aspects of ministry, including evangelism. They are unaware that their caretaker pastor has just one goal—to appease a congregation’s current membership for however long it takes for them to fail. The reason stated with confidence: the culture and demographics can no longer support the neighborhood church.

So here is what happens. The caretaker pastor faithfully serves needy members, visits regularly, prays with them, and becomes loved and respected for the personal attention given. Meanwhile, lay leaders, who are responsible for the overall health of the congregation, become concerned that the congregation is not fulfilling other aspects of vital ministry. They begin pressing for evangelism, educational services and ministry efforts the caretaker minister had no intention of ever providing.

The needy congregational members see escalating conflict as an attack on their beloved caretaker. They are content and unconcerned with church growth and budgets. Suddenly, a congregation is divided. All the players are good people with worthwhile goals, but lines are soon drawn—”good guys” vs “bad guys.”

A predictable scenario: the caretaker pastor will insist evangelism is the role of the laity.

Laity, on the other hand, think that professionally trained pastors are in a better position to conduct outreach.

A corporation does not unleash their sales force without intense training. If the Church is to rely on lay evangelists, it must give them similar support.

2×2 has experience with this situation. Over many years, we had conversations with our clergy pressing for services that might grow the congregation. We became familiar with the professional reasoning that ended up with inaction on anyone’s part.

Then one day in 2006, we found ourselves with no pastor and no hope of cooperation from our denomination in finding professional leadership. We crafted our own initiative, put the reins in the hands of untried but enthusiastic members, and pledged as a congregation to support their efforts. They met with early success and were even able to find qualified professional support (help our denomination insisted could not be found). Remarkable growth resulted.

Our denomination responded by condemning our work. The only reason given: it was not done in cooperation with the Synod Mission Office.

How silly! Congregations are not required to ask permission to invite people to come to church.

Can the Church have it both ways? Can they insist that lay people are responsible for outreach and then complain when clergy don’t lead the outreach?

If church mission must be “in cooperation” with church professionals, then they must take responsibility. They must provide pastors who roll up their sleeves and lead evangelism by example and by training, equipping, and encouraging laity—and they must be held accountable.

Denominations must insist solo pastors engage in evanglism. Do not wait for years of failure before implementing steps for success.

Quit blaming demographics and culture. Christianity has been standing up to these forces from the start.

Christ’s answer to the challenge was to empower the lay workers.