4/7InkzHVUEQeEdU9vpc1tikzEhChrKmPfvXI-FSDBrBQ

Church Growth

5 Ways Social Media Will Change Your Church’s Life

If your congregation wisely chooses to invest time and passion in social media, be prepared for many things to change. We’re not talking about self-centered Facebook prattle; we’re talking about online interaction that looks outside your parish to the community and, by the nature of the internet, the world.

This may be the hardest thing for the Church to grasp. The internet connects individuals with the world. There is no intermediary. No church council, no pastor, no synod or its equivalent, no bishop, no national church can control congregational interconnectedness.

This means that congregation’s must be more mindful of  things which may have been neglected. While it is easy to reach the world, one mission of the individual Christian community will become more intense—the care and nurturing of individual Christians.

  1. Congregational Education is vital. A congregation must be confident in knowing who they are and what thy believe if they are to engage neighbors or the world in their mission. This has always been a focus of parish life, but educational components of many churches have been dropped in the last few decades. As long as the focus of congregational life was local, it didn’t seem to matter. This needs a remedy. Education must be intertwined with every activity.
  2. Social Awareness must be nurtured. You will begin to hear from Christians from places you never considered as being Christian. Congregations must understand, for instance, the challenges Christians face in Islamic nations, where Christians can be ostracized from their families or jailed. While freedom of religion is taken for granted by many Americans, some religions maintain cultural holds on their people even IN America.
  3. The Church needs to become attuned to the minute causes of community as well as the big picture. We live in an age where anyone can bring a cause to the public’s attention. Yellow ribbons, pink ribbons, donation cans, something-a-thons become very focused. Keeping up with them will be an ongoing mission challenge.
  4. Personal faith must be deepened. Savvy companies teach every employee that they are a representative of their company culture. The Church needs to foster the same sense of ownership among members. Every member reflects on the congregation. Congregations will want their members to be knowledgeable and engaged as representatives of their church.
  5. The biggest change is that many congregations will be able to rebound from survival mode and see themselves as important. Their interconnectedness will give them energy, resources and renewed purpose.
19 Mar 2012

Make Way for the Non-geographic Future Church

We are polishing our crystal ball again. This is what we see . . .

The Church of tomorrow will have only two sociological geographies — the local church and the worldwide church. Intermediary layers will be defined by local congregations as needed — not by hierarchies.

Denominations and regional authorities will become expensive drains on local churches with waning benefits.

They and national church offices — at least as we know them today — will become archaic, outliving their purpose and mission. Once the hub of thought leadership, educational/resource publishing, and social ministry implementation, they are already being phased out by economic realities. Any congregation can form alliances with a multitude of social causes locally, nationally and internationally. Any congregant can publish.

Congregations will become identified by their works which will make them more relevant and help them grow. If they are to survive they will find vitality — quickly!

Congregations will soon realize that the dollars they are sending to regional bodies are better spent in ways they can monitor and become involved with directly. Giving will improve when results are more visible.

This is all the result of the internet.

Every congregation has the same power at its fingertips. Soon churches will realize they will get more help and better advice if they bypass the systems of the past.

Part of this is driven by economics of scale. Business has a saying: “Go big or go home.”

The church will discover this, too.

In the past, each individual judicatory duplicated similar services supported by its own 100-200 congregations. Better services will be supplied by pooling resources of more churches than one regional body can support. Local churches will bypass judicatories and go directly to enterprising thought leaders who no longer need denominational affiliation to gain an ear.

The economic failure of judicatories will return talent now stagnating in management to work in congregations.

The best ideas will be too expensive for regional bodies to implement. They will, for a while, keep trying to do things the same way . . . and fail. Frustration will turn the tide.

Denominational lines will blur as the internet helps ideas cross traditional lines. Congregations will find their own sister congregations . . . and they could be anywhere.

In the past, denominations might have worried that doctrines and traditions would be compromised without layers of oversight. No longer! Everyone has access to the same technology. This will create its own checks and balances.

Turf wars are likely at first. They could be ugly. But the realization that hierarchies are no longer needed will begin to set in.

For a while, middle management judicatories will flex muscles, trying to rein in congregations as their power weakens. There will be casualties that will be an enduring shame…but a new church will emerge.

The local congregation will become more important than ever. It will be the local hands-on expression. They will display renewed vitality as they tap resources beyond the offering plate. They will identify mission and form alliances with like-minded organizations.

We’ve spent decades in interdenominational dialogue to achieve what the internet will achieve in just a few years!

The coming Church is going to be exciting!

photo credit: frompandora via photopin cc
17 Mar 2012

Laity Need to Learn to Speak the Clergy’s Language

Talking with clergy lately, we heard some terms we doubt many lay people have ever used or heard.

Some terms universally understood among clergy describe congregational health. These terms include “hospice,” “caretaker ministries,” and even “undertaker ministries.”

Ask a lay person, “Is your church on hospice?” and they will probably look puzzled. As it dawns on them that hospice is a service provided to dying people, they will start to realize that the clergy person is asking if their church is dying and unlikely to receive meaningful support from their denomination.

They will keep listening as they recover from shock and anger sets in.

“Who’s your pastor?” might be the next question. “Is he/she part time?”

If the answer is “Yes, that’s all we can afford right now,” the clergy might nod and mutter, “Ah, —sounds like you have a caretaker ministry.”

The lay person has probably never heard this term either. When it is explained that “caretaker ministers” are assigned to churches to hold members’ hands as their congregations die, the sense of shock and anger is rekindled.

With any sensitivity, the clergy person does not use another term used among clergy — “undertaker ministers.” This type of minister has NO intention of growing a congregation’s mission and the assignment, in all probability unknown to the congregation, is that this minister is there with the denomination’s understanding that the congregation’s ministry be brought to a close with as little muss and fuss possible.

This is a prescription for church conflict.

Laity NEVER consider their congregations as dying. They are usually aware that they face challenges, but when they call a pastor they are ALWAYS looking for help with their ministry. Lay people understand that the mission is to serve. They think every clergy person they talk to or call — even on a part-time basis — has congregational health and outreach as their goal.

Laity need to use a bit of “clergy talk” when calling their ministers. If they sense the candidate understands that the mission under consideration is to close the church—not grow the church—the congregation needs to move on and make sure their denomination understands that the congregation considers mission and ministry the goal.

It might help if we all spoke the same language!

photo credit: aldenjewell via photopin cc
17 Mar 2012

LinkedIn Can Help Church Pros Connect . . . If They Use It

LinkedIn is a powerful networking tool similar to Facebook but with a professional focus.

It packs a powerful punch for anyone wanting to connect with people in a specific sphere of interest. You can use LinkedIn to find professionals who might be willing to help you. Say, for instance, you are looking for someone who has worked in ministry with disabled people or who can preach in Arabic. You can look for people with those specific skills.

Conversely, you might have a skill you feel is underused. You can feature your special interest in your profile.

LinkdIn is an “opt-in” medium. The user chooses to particpate in the online community. Users can look for connections, accept referrals, and ask for introductions.

LinkedIn users can join groups . . . also entirely opt-in. Professionals can only connect by getting someone they already know to introduce them. Even then, the person of interest must accept and initiate any resulting communication.

It’s a fairly safe way to form relationships with peers that can be helpful in your work.

One would think that anyone going to the trouble to complete a LinkedIn profile would be serious about using this amazing networking tool. Most groups are filled with names willing to be found or to help others in their searches.

2×2 found a very odd exception. We looked at a group formed around a Protestant denomination. The group had hundreds of members with very detailed profiles. Most of them had their identities shielded!

What a waste of communication potential!

Again, the Church fails to understand how the tools of today’s world can be used in mission. What are church LinkedIn members afraid of? Why bother joining a professional network and then back away from any ability to take advantage of its potential?

It’s crazy! Back to the cloister!

photo credit: JeremyMP [Catching Up] via photopin cc
15 Mar 2012

Encouraging Social Media Engagement in Congregations

Among the most frequently asked questions among new bloggers/social media practitioners is “How do we get people to “like” us or “comment.”

This is particularly difficult in the church setting because Social Media breaks a 2000-year-old tradition. Preachers preach. Congregants listen. Traditional communication is one way.

If pastors are encouraging parishioners to voice theological thoughts in public, they are asking people to make a major change in their spiritual relationships with God, the Church, and with other people. They may feel awkward, vulnerable or unqualified. This will take time.

Encouraging religious dialog among the laity is a worthwhile goal and long, long overdue. Trust must be established. Confidence must be built. Faith must be prepared for inevitable challenges. It’s a tall order and not to be rushed.

Here are some ideas.

  • Start with younger members. They are closer to their confirmation years and much more comfortable with social media, although many do not see it as a place for serious thought. Still, they are a most likely to consider it. The challenge will be to build their confidence to speak outside their circle of peers.
  • Prime the pump. Ask three people to write a blog or start a conversation on Facebook. Help them. Teach them. Guide them.
  • Engage the congregation or forum group in conversation about the online dialog and specifically ask some of them to share their insights on line. You can lead the way with your own “like” or comment.
  • Create an online poll asking questions that the posts raised. This is an easy first online engagement for people. It’s anonymous but people can see how it works.
  • Repeat this cycle monthly or quarterly or as topics arise in your community or congregation.

One more idea:

Blogging Roundtable

Have a blog roundtable. Sometimes these are called blog carnivals. It’s a new idea so you can choose any name you like. Make it fun. Blogging rodeo? Blogging round-up? Blogfest?

Ask several or many people to write on a given topic and submit a 500-word or less post in email, text or document format. Post an introductory blog to present the topic and explain the roundtable concept. Set a deadline about 10 days away. Do some behind the scenes nudging to make sure you have at least a few responses. Run a few tickler posts on the topic to get mental juices flowing. On the appointed day, publish ALL the posts at once and encourage participants and readers to mix, match and compare. You might even run a “like” contest or poll to see which ideas resonate best.

This could help rally people and engage them in a fun way.

photo credit: lovestruck. via photopin cc

23 Feb 2012

Solo Pastors Must Be Evangelists

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.

17 Feb 2012

Why Church Growth Is So Elusive

Most churches never set out to grow.

Churches talk about growth all the time — even when there is little or no growth evident across a denomination. Denominations can even adopt airs of successful growth in their convocations and publications, camouflaging double digit decline.

Why is growth desirable? Is it because of the Church’s burning need to save souls, or is it to meet the escalating costs of Christian community? There is surely some of both in the answer and other options. Nevertheless, it might be worthwhile to ponder what is really spurring the current demand for growth and change.

The problem is that we are measuring success by statistics that no one really set out to fulfill.

Imagine how big every church would be if for the last 100 years every congregation accepted 20 new members net (allowing for natural attrition). Twenty new members each year should be a modest goal for a church that is growth-oriented. It should get easier every year and explode exponentially!

It rarely happens!

Most churches and church communities are designed to fill the needs of the founding members. Growth to keep up with the economy was not in their crosshairs. Special ministries to changing communities were not what most members signed on for.

Most congregations and clergy are content when numbers provide a sense of stability.

Look at the average church building erected 100 or 200 years ago. Most were not built with growth in mind. Many were situated on donated land and built to fit the lots and house the existing worshiping community. The biggest number in mind was how many might show up on Easter morning and Christmas Eve.

When growth happened, older buildings were abandoned, new ones built or wings were added. In some cases the only option for growth was to add worship services. But these days services are often added for convenience or worship style options — not to accommodate growth.

If growth is so important, why isn’t it planned from the beginning?

When are extra pastors added? Answer: when growth has already happened and the congregation can afford an additional salary. Extra hands are rarely sought when the mission work justifies it but only when there are already more service needs and a foreseeable budget to sustain those existing needs.

If growth is truly a goal and more hands are needed to achieve growth, we have to start thinking outside the foresight of our founding matriarchs and patriarchs. We have to return to true mission, not economic salvation.

We have to provide help where it is most needed — neighborhood churches. Yes, even the small ones. That’s where true denominational growth will take root.

The temptation for denominational leaders is to look for easier success formulas and provide the strongest support to the congregations who can sustain their current budgets—for the time being, at least.

We have to take some chances.

Where do we start?

photo credit: BurgTender via photopin cc

15 Feb 2012

Why Small Churches Will Save Mainline Denominations

The small church has been neglected for quite a while. Tragically, the neglect has been intentional. It is also short-sighted.

Denominational middle management stressed viablity in congregations at a time when the economy was impacting their own bottom line. Small churches became attractive targets for closure. Their weaknesses were highlighted while the denominations’ struggles were hidden from view. The attitude was, “We know what’s best for you. We can make better use of your resources. Praise God for your 100-150 years of dedication. Hand over the keys and where do you keep the money?” No “please”; no “thank you.”

This attitude reflects a dereliction of duty. Denominations exist to serve and once you write off your constituency, ethical dilemmas soon abound.

Suddenly, the failure of small churches becomes a goal — the sooner the better, and please make it easy. Little time and attention are spent on the problems of the small church. Clergy fail to hear God’s call for small parish ministry. Small churches must rely on lay skills and the devotion of retired clergy, whose training and active years predate the current thinking.

This is a shame. Small churches are ideally situated to address many of the problems faced by denominations today.

It’s a David and Goliath scenario.

A Goliath church is large and cumbersome. It looks down on the rest of the world and can be haughty about its wealth and prestige. The budget is top-heavy with professional salaries and property maintenance. Parish life revolves around making these assets function. This makes it more difficult to identify change in the community and refocus on changing ministry priorities. Any priorities to be addressed must fit the skills and interests of salaried leaders. The priority is always paying pastors and keeping up the building. A Goliath church has an army of support. Armies work best when there is someone giving orders.

A David church is small, agile and wiry. It meets the rest of the world eye to eye. It doesn’t have the status of larger churches, but it is likely to know very well where its strengths lie. It has a hard time getting the attention of denominational leadership. It presses forward, relying on members’ talent, fueled by a spirit and devotion that is ready to overcome any obstacle. It does not have much in the way of internal hierarchy to weigh it down. It can change ministry plans and emphases easily as neighborhoods change and new challenges arise. Any member can implement a new idea. A David church is likely to change quickly and the denomination, who may have been paying no attention for years, is none the wiser.

Mainline denominations face challenges today that are ideal for David-sized church ministries. Small churches are likely to interact personally with visitors and less likely to depend on someone else taking the lead. Multicultural ministries can be easily pursued in neighborhoods where populations are changing. The disabled and disenfranchised can be served one on one without unwieldy programs. Families led by single parents can easily find support and acceptance. David churches have been training their own leaders for decades. They have skills and energy that King Saul would not notice — until he is desperate.

Of course, large churches can also address these issues, but there is a greater tendency to create programs led by well-paid experts, while small churches will roll up their sleeves and embrace challenges personally.

The problem is that denominations come to their David churches with Goliath expectations and solutions. Small churches know they cannot afford Goliath budgets. That doesn’t mean that closing David churches and reallocating their assets is the answer. The answer is in finding ways to help David churches be the best they can be with their resources. Use their resources to help them with their challenges.

Wise denominations will look to their small David churches for ideas and energy and stop viewing them as tomorrow’s dinner.

11 Feb 2012

A New Year, A New Vision and A New Journey

This is the headline of an e-letter recently sent to the professional leaders of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America by Bishop Claire Burkat.

Bishop Burkat announced that she and the church were having an epiphany.

“The age of the mainline Church as many of us have known it has passed, and there is no blueprint for our journey in this next, rapidly accelerating age.”

The epiphany may have struck sooner and taken fewer casualties if Bishop Burkat had taken time to get to know congregations when she took office. Heart to heart dialog at the time might have helped her hear things we congregations were trying to tell her. We could have helped her lead. That’s the Lutheran way. Interdependence.

It has taken almost every day of her six-year term, but Bishop Burkat has discovered some things for herself.

“The most apparent changes in our congregations and denominations so far see us shifting our focus from relying on professional staff, planning programs, keeping-up buildings, and preserving institutions toward engaging people inside and outside our churches in spritual conversation, as well as creating caring communities, collaborative service, and collective discernment.”

Redeemer was trying to tell her that. We had forged our way, with very little reliance on professional leadership. We had fostered good relationships with neighborhood organizations. We had relied on the gifts of the laity. We recognized that God was at work in our community in a new and creative way.

Now SEPA has a new blog to share ministry stories of its member churches. Although the site invites us to Tell Our Story, we doubt that our story would make it past moderation. So we will tell our story here. Feel free to tweet or reblog or post it on God Is Doing Something Good Blog for us.

  • Redeemer had a growing outreach ministry to East African immigrants. They had found a church home in East Falls and were growing in participation and leadership. Redeemer of the 20th century had welcomed the 21st century, adapting our traditions—not forsaking them—to welcome many new people.
    Bishop Burkat and SEPA discouraged our ministry and locked us all out of God’s House.
  • Redeemer was concentrating on developing lay leadership.
    That need is the topic of Alban Institute’s Roundtable this week. Redeemer had been working at this for a decade. 
  • Redeemer had a plan to help immigrant families locate starter homes, obtain mortgages and make necessary renovations.
    Bishop Burkat and SEPA made this impossible.
  • Redeemer had a plan to pioneer congregational use of the web. The fact that we were locked out of our church home made this a priority.
    If you are reading this (along with our more than 100 daily readers) you have discovered our ground-breaking blog.
  • Redeemer recognized that our property, rented to a Lutheran Social Service agency, was contributing to a valued neighborhood ministry. This was a mission alliance that served a church agency, our congregation and neighborhood. If money were our sole objective, we could have rented our property for more.
    Bishop Burkat and SEPA’s interference put the agency in the middle of a property dispute. They chose to shut down their 25-year presence in our community.
  • With this long-standing mission project ruined by SEPA, Redeemer worked for a year to develop a school that would serve the community in a way which would also foster religious values.
    Bishop Burkat and SEPA evicted the school just as it was about to open.
  • Redeemer recognized that a neighborhood ministry to immigrants, while valuable and God’s apparent plan for us, was not likely to be funded from the offering plate. Neither would an outreach mission to college-aged youth and young professionals, also a large part of East Falls neighborhood. Both were obvious missions for any church in East Falls. We worked to develop alternate income streams using our assets.
    Bishop Burkat and SEPA sued us to obtain our property and endowment funds for their own use.

God continues to work through Redeemer.

In our excommunicated state, we began visiting other Lutheran churches. We started to see firsthand many common challenges. We are responding.

  • We are creating a model for a program that would help small congregations create an eductional outreach and reconnect with their neighborhoods. VBS-aid is getting inquiries from all over the coutnry. It’s an idea that could bring many benefits to the emerging 21st century church and to SEPA. It needs start-up funding.
  • Abandoned by our own denomination, Redeemer is forming new relationships with other Lutheran groups and other denominations. We are pioneering an educational model for congregations that would not be expensive and would create ongoing dialog and community—another good idea with growing support.

If SEPA hadn’t taken our money, we could fund our projects with our own money.

Bishp Burkat ends her missive to SEPA professional leaders:

“Let’s perceive this journey into uncharted territory as a great adventure. There will be dangers, and we will surely make mistakes.”

Bishop Burkat is right. Mistakes will—and have been—made.

It is not too late to admit that SEPA’s actions in East Falls were just that—a mistake. The art of leadership, especially Christian leadership, is to recognize mistakes and take actions to reconcile.

This is a leadership quality all churches must foster. Congregations must be free to make mistakes without hungry big brother/sister Church waiting to take advantage.

The road into the the future would be smoother if SEPA could admit their mistakes. Instead of counting coup on the neighborhood congregations, try respecting that God may be at work in ways you have yet to understand. That’s the value of an epiphany.

Redeemer may be SEPA’s most valuable congregation — and we’re not talking about land and endowments. Assigned an excommunicated status, declared to be dying, Redeemer has been trail-blazing.

It’s not too late to make things right in East Falls. We are ready for reconciliation. Are you?

As Bishop Burkat points out, “God is God and we are not.”

31 Jan 2012

Lay Leaders May Save the Mainline Church

Today’s post in the Alban Institute’s Roundtable is a fascinating study on a topic important to today’s Church—the role of lay leadership.

The article is an excerpt from a book, Scattering Seeds: Cultivating Church Vitality, by Stephen Chapin Garner (a pastor) with Jerry Thornell (a lay member).

The post begins with their New England congregation’s realization that professional leadership is an endangered commodity. Fewer young people are entering seminary. The number of second career pastors cannot keep up with the demand that is looming with coming retirements.

They answered the challenge by intentionally developing stronger lay leadership. The church grew. An unexpected result—their congregation sent seven members to seminary.

The authors talk about how the familiar visioning process never could have led them in the direction that ended up increasing their membership and helping to solve a denominational problem as well.

It all sounds familiar to 2×2. We found ourselves forced by a number of factors to rely on lay leadership. Had we relied solely on the recommended process of visioning and drafting a mission statement, we would probably still be holding special meetings to change a comma here or there.

Instead, we went to work. We addressed immediate needs and challenges. We prayed — a lot! We returned to the basics — making sure there was a quality worship experience, good preaching and hospitality. We took a few chances.

We relied on the talents of our members. When we were doing the work, we were more inclined to be invitational.

We gave ourselves room to grow. We cultivated a nonjudgmental atmosphere, allowing mistakes so that we could all learn together. We stretched. We maintained good relationships with supply pastors but were soon able to get by with minimal clergy.

The answer to congregational growth in challenging economic times may be in nurturing the laity — not in expensive hierarchical fixes.

30 Jan 2012