Andy Rowell | Church Leadership Conversations

My sermon "The Spirit-led Missional Church" (Acts 11) Audio

I preached Sunday, March 30th at Clayton Presbyterian Church in Clayton, North Carolina.  My text was Acts 11:1-18 as part of a series in the book of Acts.   I would argue that this is one of the most important texts on the church in mission in the New Testament. 

The iTunes link is Clayton Presbyterian Church Podcasts (will only work if you have iTunes - a free program - installed on your computer). 

The direct link is Clayton Presbyterian Church Sermons - you can download the sermon there or listen to it streaming. 

I have also made a copy of the recording and put it here. 

Summary:
In the sermon, I suggest we appreciate the passion for un-churched people that seeker-driven churches embody.  I also suggest, however, that there is real value in churches that are very diverse and ignore the seeker-driven philosophy of reaching a specific target audience.  I suggest that Acts 11:1-18 (which essentially retells Acts 10) in which Cornelius, the Gentile centurion comes to faith in Jesus, exemplifies what mission in the church should be like.  Not only are unbelievers reached but diverse ones.  I suggest that the Acts 10-11 narrative can serve as a paradigm as we think about the mission of our churches. 

Here are some of the points I draw out from the narrative:  Change is hard.  We all like to stay in our comfort zones.  Prayer is where it starts but our prayers are often weak.  We are prodded by the Spirit to obey what is clear.  We are to do this work with others.  The message of Jesus is simple.  The Spirit goes before us.  What can we do to get out of the way so that people can see Jesus?

Additional notes on some of the examples in the sermon:

• I mention Donald McGavran - one of the founders of the Church Growth Movement
• Saddleback Church - I reflected a bit about Rick Warren's book The Purpose Driven Church at Strengths of the Purpose Driven Church and Sober Advice For Those Considering the Megachurch. 
• I reflect more on this issue of having a target audience at: Why pastors should be both goal-setting fanatics and goal-setting cynics
• Hot Metal Bridge Faith Community in Pittsburgh, PA
• I mention in passing the difficulty of change in organizations (including churches) and list a number of business book titles that try to address this problem.  Perhaps the one to start with is: Kotter, John P. Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press, 1996.

• The quotes I used in the message that you might enjoy. 

1. There is the old pastor’s legend about the pastor who wanted to move the piano to the other side of the sanctuary and the way he got away with it was by moving it an inch every week.   Source: I can't remember where I heard this one. 

2. Pastors often overestimate what they can change in one year but underestimate what they can change in five years.  Source: I first heard this from Sandy Millar at Holy Trinity Brompton Church but I don't think it was original to him. 

3. Erik Erikson  “all change is perceived as loss.” Source: internet.   

4. If you find the perfect church, don’t join it or it will no longer be perfect.  Source: I can't remember. 

5. Like Noah’s ark, it stinks being inside but it is still better than being outside.  Source: I can't remember.   

6. Mark Twain: "It ain't the parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand." Source: internet. 

7. G.K Chesterton: “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.” Source: internet.

Willow Creek's Discipleship Problem: How to Fix the Seeker-driven Church

Update, December 10, 2007

As I suspected, the interpretation and methodology of the Reveal study are deeply flawed.  I like Willow Creek's ministry model but they have really bungled this survey. 

See the Review of Reveal by Bradley Wright, a sociologist at the University of Connecticut. 

Here’s a selection from Wright’s conclusions:

The conclusion draw by the study’s authors, and loudly echoed by critics of Willow Creek, is that the Willow model is flawed. The data presented here are sufficiently ambiguous to make such strong claims. Given the weaknesses of the study design and analytic strategy, it’s possible that the results indicate strong support for the Willow Creek model . . . Simply repeating the Reveal study with hundreds more churches potentially adds very little knowledge.

Though Willow does not need to repent for its ministry strategy (though we could all repent for our ministry strategies to some extent - whose is perfect?), those who published this sociologically unsophisticated research probably need to apologize to seeker-sensitive church proponents everywhere. It is hard to say if Willow’s reputation will ever recover from the tidal wave of publicity saying that the Reveal quantitative data discredits Willow’s approach.

Still, all is not lost. The idea of doing quantitative research is a good one. But next time Reveal needs to do it right. Those who are part of Reveal need to do a serious crash course in American religious sociology: Christian Smith, Mark Chaves, Robert Wuthnow, Scott Thumma, and Nancy Ammerman.

For an example of a more a more sociologically sophisticated study see the U.S. Congregations Study which surveyed 300,000 congregations in 2001.

U.S. Congregations Survey

U.S. Congregational Life Survey, 2001, Random Attenders

Or see the:

National Congregations Study

See also the excellent summary of different recent postings about this at Leadership Networks Leanings blog "Reveal Squeal gets louder on the web" by DJ Chuang.

Original Post October 19, 2007

Though Willow Creek continues to reach "people far from God" they admit that they are not doing as good a job at helping those people become "fully devoted followers of Jesus" as they thought they were.  Of course a lot of critics are saying "We told you so" but it is good Bill Hybels and friends are broadcasting their "mistake." (Leadership's Out of Ur blog post "Willow Creek Repents?" brought this to my attention.  There are 120 comments there now on that post).  They also have an updated post with a response from Willow Creek: Willow Creek Repents? (Part 2): Greg Hawkins responds with the truth about REVEAL.  They are not giving up their seeker approach.

Below I have summarize what Willow Creek has realized in the last few years in five quick statements.  Then I have described Willow Creek for those who are unfamiliar with it.  Finally, I have tried to put in perspective their five realizations. 

"Willow Creek's Five Realizations."
1. They want to be good stewards.  They want to use the financial resources they are given in the offering plate wisely. 
2. Research helps. They did a survey. 
3. They are still effective with seekers. They find that people who are exploring Christianity or are new Christians still rate what Wilow is offering very highly. 
4.  Consumer discipleship is not working.  There are many people who are highly involved in activities (i.e. consuming the religious goods they are offering) but are not growing in Christ that much. 
5.  Many mature Christians are unsatisfied with the church. There are a number of people who are strong Christians but are dissatisfied with their church.  But, Willow has concluded, the issue is not just offering people more meaty options, rather people need to learn to feed themselves.

All of this is available on their new website (August 2007) "Reveal."  You can hear executive pastor Greg Hawkins and founding pastor Bill Hybels describe the findings in their own words in 13 minute video presentations.  (I had to use Internet Explorer rather than Firefox to make them work).   Or you can buy the book which is only available from Willow Creek Resources.  (Why not have Amazon distribute it too?)

Who is Willow Creek?
If you don't know who Willow Creek Community Church is, it is the "second most influential church in the nation" according to a survey commissioned by Leadership Network. 

Still, many mainline church leaders (Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran) have never heard of Willow Creek, which is something I have become increasingly sensitive to.  Those people have other churches they admire.  They wouldn't admire Willow even if they knew about it because they place much more value on continuity with the the great tradition of Christianity as passed down through church history and denominations. 

Anyway, Willow Creek Community Church (i.e "Willow") is led by Bill Hybels who founded it 30 years ago in South Barrington, IL which is about 45 minutes from Chicago in the suburbs.  It is a non-denominational church with weekly attendance of about 23,500 according to Hartford Seminary's database of megachurches.  It was designed specifically for "seekers" or what they now call "people far from God."  As the story goes Hybels, walked around the area going to door to door asking people why they didn't go to church and they reported things like "they are always asking us for money," "boring," "irrelevant," "nothing for the kids." So Hybels and friends started a church in a movie theater that had upbeat music, relevant sermons, and no offering plates.  As the church grew exponentially, they formed a consulting branch in 1992 called Willow Creek Association which sells resources to churches like bible study materials, sermon tapes, etc. and also holds conferences.  Churches can become a member of the Willow Creek Association but all this really means is that the pastor subscribes to their resources for about $249 a year. 

Perspective and Context on Willow Creek's Five Realizations.

1. They want to be good stewards. My comment: Amen.  May they continue to wrestle with the problem.  When you see Willow Creek's facility, you are either envious or disgusted.  There is a 7400 seat auditorium complete with state of the art lights and audio.  The building includes a bookstore, coffee shop, and expansive facilities for children.  Most people say, "It feels like a mall."  These facilities were intended to make Willow a comfortable place for people who were turned off to church and needed to hear about Jesus in a place that was more familiar than a gothic cathedral.  I think this makes sense given their philosophy of ministry.  Still, it is very good to hear them saying, "We want to welcome people well but we don't want to spend a penny more than we have to.  Are we spending God's resources appropriately?  Are there other ways that God might be calling the wealthy North American church to use its resources?"  Additional note: Willow Creek has never had a major financial scandal and their books, salaries, etc. are public.

2. Research helps. My comment: Make sure this research is done well.  Randy Frazee, author of The Connecting Church, has been a pastor at Willow for a few years now.  He is one of the preeminent people in the evangelical world insisting that we need to measure and assess the development of people's discipleship.  As pastor of Pantego Bible Church in Texas, he came to see the need for assessing whether small groups actually help people become better disciples.  He even made up a tool to measure discipleship called The Christian Life Profile. 

I was glad to see Willow hire Randy because I knew he would encourage them to evaluate how they are doing beyond the kneejerk way it is often done, i.e. the ABC's (Attendence, Buildings and Cash) or the three B's (Bodies, Buildings and Bucks). 

I would simply urge them to continue to get good advice about how to do sociological research well.  There are many people out there doing research on the American church and for this I'm thrilled.  Here are some that I'm familiar with: Barna Group, Gallup Poll, Baylor Surveys of Religion, Natural Church Development, Pulpit & Pew: The Duke Center for Excellence in Ministry, National Study of Youth & Religion, the Louisville Institute, Hartford Institute for Religious Research, the new book After the Baby Boomers: How Twenty- and Thirty-Somethings Are Shaping the Future of American Religion
by Robert Wuthnow (chair of the sociology department at Princeton University), Church Innovations, the Alban Institute.  But the devil is in the details.  Numbers can be manipulated to say most anything.  We, as church leaders, have got to pay more attention to appropriate use of statistics.  I am not saying we need to use statistics less.  Actually, I think we need to do so more but we need to deal with those statistics and studies in a better way.  We need people who know statistics and who understand sociological research so that our numbers mean something.  (Are there any sociology majors and professors at Christian colleges out there listening to this?)  We need people who can sort through all of these statistics in such a way that it makes sense and in a way that is meaningful for congregations.  It drives me crazy when I hear stats like, "You know you need to add another service when 80% of seating is filled up" and "You know children who sit in the worship service with their parents continue to attend church after they have left home better than those who just go to youth group."  Sure, these have a glimmer of truth but they are more conventional wisdom (i.e urban legend) than solid analysis.  People build entire ministries on statistics like this.  For more outrage at evangelical misuse of statistics, see Christian Smith's "Evangelicals Behaving Badly with Statistics: Mistakes were made" from Books & Culture February 2007 and "What Scandal? Whose Conscience? Some reflections on Ronald Sider's Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience." by John G. Stackhouse, Jr. from Books & Culture August 2007 .   

3.  They are still effective with seekers. My comment: Willow Creek's gift to the wider church has been its passion to see unchurched people become followers of Jesus. Willow Creek, along with Andy Stanley's North Point Community Church, is still one of the best examples of an effective seeker model.  They see many people who were not Christians become Christians.  In this way, they are a model of contextualizing the gospel so that nonChristians can learn about it and begin to follow Jesus.  Though there are other ways of doing evangelism by the church, the seeker model is still one to be reckoned with because most the other approaches are so ineffective.  (Are lots of adults becoming Christians at the churches you know?) 

One of the principle problems with the seeker approach is that they replace Sunday worship with Sunday evangelism services.  Willow though still does have a worship service on Wednesday nights called "New Community."  Though some would see Sunday seeker services as a tragic terrible flaw, I think it is a valid move because of the lack of evangelism happening through other methods and because I place less value on the traditional-handed-down-for-centuries liturgy. 

Other resources on this topic: I recently wrote a reflection on this: Download The Seeker Model Paper.doc.  See Andy Stanley's Seven Practices of Effective Ministry for the most persuasive compelling case for the seeker-driven approach.  See my category Andy Stanley for more that I've written about him.  For a critique of the seeker approach, see The Great Giveaway: Reclaiming the Mission of the Church from Big Business, Parachurch Organizations, Psychotherapy, Consumer Capitalism, and Other Modern Maladies by David E. Fitch. 

Many mainline denomination (Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Lutheran) people who have a heart for evangelism put forward the Alpha course as the best evangelism program going right now.  It, like the seeker approach, allows people to learn about Jesus in a non-threatening way, with informational talks about the basics of Christianity by the winsome Nicky Gumbel, a meal, non-directed conversation in a non-churchy atmosphere.  The Alpha course comes from Holy Trinity Brompton in London, England.  They do this on a Tuesday night and then have regular worship services on Sundays.  Thus, you keep the tradition on Sundays but have effective evangelism program during the week.  For many people, this is the ideal approach. 

Interestingly though there are some mainline people who want to imitate seeker driven approaches (e.g. United Methodist Bill Easum and  Episcopalian Tom Ehrich).   

  4.  Consumer discipleship is not working.  My comment: Programs have limited usefulness.  It sounds good to put a system in place as Rick Warren suggests in The Purpose Driven Church (p.130) where people move from 101 (first base - discovering membership) to 201 (second base - discovering spiritual maturity), to 301 (third base - discovering my ministry) to 401 (home - discovering my life mission).  But discipleship is not an assembly line and it just doesn't work (for long) like that.  After working at seeker-driven megachurch, my friend wrote me: "I think discipling people may only be able to be done a few at a time."

Another friend wrote me about his experience working in a megachurch, "The megachurch approach can truly breed an unhealthy consumerism mentality. Specializing in everything to cater to our every need (affinity groups, a cafe in the lobby, Sunday school programs for children that are incredible, etc) isn't always bad, but can foster a 'it's all about me' mentality."  This is the concern of basically all of the critics of the megachurch approach. 

5.  Many mature Christians are unsatisfied with the church. Their conclusion is that people need to learn to feed themselves.  My comment: I think probably people want tradition and depth not just a personalized spiritual growth program. John Ortberg, now pastor at Menlo Park Presbyterian (PCUSA), was a pastor at Willow Creek for many years.  He has written one of the very best books on "feeding yourself" called The Life You've Always Wanted: Spiritual Disciplines for Ordinary People.  These were originally sermons at Willow.  It is not new to Willow to feed yourself.  Thus, I think they probably need to dig deeper in order to find out what the path forward should really be. 

Hybels says that one thing they want to do is help people design a personal spiritual growth plan.  On the one hand, this still sounds consumeristic.  But on the other hand, my experience in theological education does lead me to believe that when mature Christians want to dig deep intellectually in order to further grow in their faith, they have very different interests as is evident in any list of course offerings at a seminary.  (See Fuller Seminary's School of Theology courses or Duke Divinity School's list of courses). 

This leads to my other point.  I think some of the mature Christians who are dissatisfied with what they are receiving at Willow, want a better connection to Christian history.  You find this in spades here at Duke Divinity School.  People want to connect to Augustine, Aquinas, Barth - someone with more worldwide and historical importance.  Traditional liturgical churches have a taste of those resources in the music and liturgy of every worship service.  The most extreme form of being unsatisfied with the nondenominational church is converting to Catholicism which a few of my friends have done.  Because church tradition is the one thing Willow decided to systematically expunge during its founding, its people miss it.  Like most churches, its greatest strength is also its greatest weakness. 

If Willow's mature believers long for history, there is no quick fix.  But here are some suggestions. 

• Give each of the staff a subscription to Christian History. 
• Encourage mature Christians to take seminary correspondence courses. 
• Foster connections with local Roman Catholic priests and nuns to do spiritual direction. 
• Attempt to introduce a modified Anglican eucharist to the mid-week service (Invitation, Confession, Gloria, Word, Eucharist, Benediction). 
• Use Robert Webber's outstanding eight volume Complete Library of Christian Worship which gives us an easy to use reference for deepening worship through the insights of the centuries. 
• Have the staff and congregation work through some of Richard Foster's Renovare resources like Devotional Classics and Spiritual Classics. 
• Have learning sessions with mainline people who have confessional (orthodox) theology and are pro-evangelism who are positive about things like the Alpha course (described above).
  
• Listen to North Park New Testament professor, amazing blogger, and Willow Creek attender Scot McKnight.
• Ask Mark Noll, preeminent historian and former Wheaton College professor, now at Notre Dame and author of Scandal of the Evangelical Mind. 

 
If those solutions seem too far removed from the Bible-centered non-denominational tradition, then at least read the very best Biblical Studies people that you can find (which I am told Randy Frazee is now doing).  I recommend An Annotated Guide to Biblical Resources for Ministry by David R. Bauer or Commentary and Reference Survey: A Comprehensive Guide to Biblical and Theological Resources by John Glynn as a way of sorting through the vast array of commentaries out there.   When you are preaching, you should always (if possible - I have always been near a theological library), consult commentaries.  Use these resources to find some good ones.  When you begin a series, invited your congregation members to buy a commentary and read through it with you.

Update.  Here are a couple of "I told you so" articles:

"Willow Creek Repents?
by Diana Butler Bass, author of Christianity for the Rest of Us: How the Neighborhood Church Is Transforming the Faith.  Book description: "A detailed survey of progressive church growth in recent decades reveals how non-evangelical, neighborhood churches are flourishing without emulating the tactics of mega-churches, in an analysis that counsels Protestant readers on how to remain authentic to denominational traditions while promoting one's spiritual community."

A Shocking “Confession” from Willow Creek Community Church
by Bob Burney, a Christian radio host in Columbus, Ohio

FAQ about Worship: Seekers, Emotions, and Me-Songs

Some students at Taylor University, where I taught the last two years, have asked me eight questions about worship.  Their questions touch on a number of issues related to contemporary worship but also worship in general.  Here are my responses. 

#1: What is your definition of worship?

• It is not really a definition but I like 1 Corinthians 14:15 (TNIV) "So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding." Paul here is arguing that there should be an affective (emotional, hearty, tongues) part of worship but also a part that is cognitive (intellectual, heady, prophecy).  He actually thinks that tongues are a good thing but if you do focus too much on emotional stuff in worship that only resonates with you (uninterrupted tongues) than a lot of other people will be annoyed and not edified (built up). 
• I think Communion/Lord's Supper/Eucharist is probably the best example of what worship is.  It is centered on Christ, communal, symbolic, looks forward to him coming again, tangible (you eat and drink something), involves prayer, and singing (in the gospel accounts), remembers back, and builds on the Old Testament (Passover).  You can't go wrong with this as a starting point. Catholics and Anglicans/Episcopalians center their worship around the Eucharist for this reason.  Jesus told people to celebrate it in the gospels and then we see people doing it (Paul in 1 Cor 11). 
• With regard to definition: one Hebrew word means work/worship; a Greek word means bow. 
• Declaring to God what he's worth (worth-ship = worship). 
• The chief end of human beings is to worship God and enjoy him forever (Westminster Catechism). 
• People often look at Isaiah 6 and Revelation 4-5 as other paradigm examples on which to build your theology of worship.   

    #2: How do you wrestle with the "me" focus and making a meaningful response to God?

• Some people go crazy turning "me" songs into "we" songs but I think this is too simplistic.  Even if we are a community, we are still a community of individuals, right?  Also, the Psalms have lots of first person singular language (me, I) and they were used in the temple and then in the church (John Calvin especially) as the corporate prayerbook.  Monks have prayed the whole Psalter (all 150) every week.   However, those who think that they would be better off worshipping by themselves on a mountain top rather than joining a community, have missed Christianity.  But again, there is a place for personal retreats.  The thing to emphasize is that we become part of the people of God when we become Christians.  Becoming a Christian is not just fire insurance for when you die someday, then you can go to heaven.  Yes, it is that but it is about being part of a community of disciples of Jesus who God has called to be his ambassadors here on earth and that we embody the kingdom of God already but not yet fully.

    #3: How do you choose worship music? Are there certain themes that you look for? Does that change depending on environment?

• By the way, these are excellent questions.  Yes, choosing worship music. I have a blog post about some of the practical ways we tried to plan worship at the church.  I would recommend reading that.  It is very practical. 
  

  How to plan and lead worship

• Does it change depending on the environment?  Yes.  I think as worship leaders we should think of ourselves as missionaries or educators. (Here is where your Christian Educational Ministries classes might help.  We need to know our audience / students, etc. and help them to praise the Lord.  We need to speak their language and begin where they are at.  As Thomas Groome, in Shared Christian Praxis would say, we need to bring people from where they are at (their "present action" = Movement 1) to reflecting on that (Movement 2 = Confession) to God (Movement 3) to action (Movements 4-5).  In order to do that, we need to know the people.  For many years before Vatican II in the 1950's, all Roman Catholic worship services or "mass" as they call it, were in Latin. But most people couldn't understand it.  They decided at Vatican II (a big conference of Catholics) to let the mass be done in people's everyday languages!  Similarly, I think we should lead worship in a way that "speaks the language" of teenage African American kids (hip-hop) or whatever language the group understands.  This is what a good missionary does and what a good educator does.   

   #4: How do you react to the statement "One cannot sing praise songs without noticing how first person pronouns tend to eclipse every other subject?"

• I think the person who is saying it (I don't know who but I know the type) wants to beware of narcissistic (self-centered) tendencies.  They want to correct the excesses of consumer culture which says everything only has value in what it can do for me.   But I think they are reacting in the wrong sort of way.  Like I said above, the Psalms are often first person singular.  We/us songs can be just as vacuous (shallow) as I/me songs.   I would be sympathetic to the person's concerns in that we want people to focus on God, not themselves, but the pronouns I and me are just part of the way we speak and are not inherently bad.  Again, I would want to sympathize with the person making the criticism that Christianity is more than just praying a prayer to go to heaven. It is not just individualistic one-time thing that excludes ethical commitments, commitments to Christian friendships/community/church/accountability/critique. Again, the danger of the individualistic thing (me and my Bible on a mountaintop  - I don't need anyone else ever in my life) is not generally the problem with people who are passionate about contemporary worship in my opinion.  But there may be exceptions.  I see the Vineyard, Matt Redman, Chris Tomlin worship folks as quite committed to Christian community despite some of their I/me songs. 

   #5: How does the corporate worship that occurs on Sunday morning differ from the corporate worship of chapel or other Christian formation experiences throughout the week?

• Again, excellent question.  I think it makes sense to worship with those who are your primary community.  I think it makes sense that those who hold you accountable (those who would call you on sin in your life) that those people are the people you worship with.  Thus, I think there is some rationale for chapel at a Christian college or even worship in a small group. 
• There is some reason by Christian tradition to worship on Sunday (the Lord's day) but I don't think this is crucial.  I think Sat night services (or any other day) is fine!  Additionally, I think that Sunday worship in a church may offer some things you don't get in chapel and dorm floor prayer and praise.  For example, intergenerational relationships (we can learn from older people and from kids); stability (it is not an entirely new group of people every four years); and locality (ministry to people locally).   Again, I think there is great value in extended evenings of singing (it teaches musicians new music, people learn to sing better, it is good to refocus, etc.) but just a worship night and never being part of a community would be a deficient Christianity (need discipleship, evangelism, ministry to the poor, and community care). 

    #6: What can seekers gain from worshiping?

• See 1 Corinthians 14:23-25 (TNIV).  23 So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and inquirers or unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind? 24 But if an unbeliever or an inquirer comes in while everyone is prophesying, they are convicted of sin and are brought under judgment by all, 25 as the secrets of their hearts are laid bare. So they will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!"
• What Paul is saying here is that worship should be comprehensible to non-Christians.  That does not mean it should be watered down.  Paul is simply saying that new people will probably attend every worship service and the basics of the service should be fairly understandable to them.  If everyone in the room is speaking in tongues, than the new person would understandably be confused.  Paul thinks that it is possible that the observer will be moved by what he or she sees when they observe Christians in worship when the service is intelligible. Now there is a wide range of applications of this that I think are legitimate.  A Roman Catholic feels they have made it understandable enough by having the liturgy in the hymnal and in the common language. Andy Stanley / Willow Creek / and Granger Community Church (Granger, IN) would say these verses are their primary purpose.  Their primary goal is to inspire and intrigue seekers to come back and to say, "God is really among you!"  In order to do that, they meticulously plan their worship services to praise God and tell about his truth but doing so in a way that the average non-Christian in their community would understand.  They try to rid their services of extraneous theological jargon while still conveying accurately the truths about God.   Some would say that this is putting the cart before the horse or having the tail wag the dog, "Why would you let non-Christians decide what Christian worship is?  Worship is for Christians!"  But the seeker driven people would respond, "But aren't we supposed to be 'the one organization that exists for non-members' (William Temple)?  Isn't the point to 'make disciples' (Matt 28:18-20 Great Commission)?"  I would urge the seeker-driven church proponent people to make sure they are not just reaching people where they are at but also helping them develop into sacrificial close imitators of Jesus.  I would urge the worship purists to make sure they have other ways of reaching non-Christians for Christ (such as the Alpha course or vibrant personal evangelism).  I think either approach can be legitimate. 

    #7: What kind of music we should sing, particularly in regards to worship music?

• There was a time that drums were seen as the music of the devil.  But people responded by saying, "Martin Luther put hymns to bar tunes" and redeemed that musical genre.  (I'm not sure if that Luther thing is actually true.  Perhaps it is.  People repeat it a lot though).  I think it is conceivable that some music in itself is incompatible with Christian worship.  I think of shrieking heavy metal where the words are incomprehensible.  I think this is comparable to the discussion by Paul in 1 Cor 12-14 about tongues.  That just because it moves you emotionally and it is done with a Christian motivation, doesn't mean it is appropriate for Christian worship.  But maybe those people who shriek the 23rd Psalm can do it by themselves or with a small group of people who appreciate that in a setting outside of corporate worship. They should still be going to a church service where there is in Paul's words "intelligible" content to the worship services.   

    #8: What part do you think that traditional worship should play in corporate worship?

• Again, as an educator or missionary, you are trying to help the whole audience understand the message.  Thus, I think if you have lots of older people who have difficulty comprehending the words and singing contemporary worship, then it is your job to help them do so or to incorporate aspects of worship that they do understand (like hymns).  This is what we did in our church as you can see from the worship guidelines I mention above in number 3.   However, I would also try to make the case to the older people that "the church is an organization that exists for the purpose of its non-members" and thus we need to continue to pursue methods that make it more likely that when "inquirers or unbelievers come in" (1 Cor 14:23) and young people come in, "they will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, 'God is really among you!'" (1 Cor 14:25) because the service is designed to be intelligible (1 Cor 12-14) to them. 

Seven Practices of Effective Ministry

  On Tuesday I listened to the first two of "Seven Practices of Effective Ministry" podcasts with Andy Stanley, Reggie Joiner and Lane Jones.  They are the authors of the popular 2004 book of that title.  I have heard pastors recommend this book in the last year more often than any other. 

Two comments and a question:

1. I want to thank them for putting this out for free.  Podcasts are great!  I love audio for when I am in the car!  It is great to hear the North Point folks trying to explain how they practically implement these tips. 

2. I have been reflecting on how these hints apply to worship planning.  It has been helpful for me. 

For "Clarify the Win," I am asking: do we want to be a) more seeker-sensitive, b) have more meaningful worship, c) equip worship leaders, d) see more participation, e) have more ancient and contemporary worship, or f) see more age-blended worship?  North Point tries to have their worship leaders create unforgettable experiences because they are seeker-driven.  It would be good to get clear with the leadership of a church what we are trying to achieve in worship.  Once we have that, they encourage us to state it simply, repeat it often and celebrate it. 

They encourage intentionality in their "Think Steps Not Programs" practice.  How do we make sure that worship is actually moving people where we want them to go?  How does it fit with the overall plan of the church?  Is it central or peripheral?  If it is peripheral, nix it.  In other words, there are lots of nice things we could do in worship (improve the prayer time, sharpen the PowerPoint, improve the flow of songs, etc.) but do these improvements unintentionally produce more problems in other areas of the church life?  The North Point folks want everything to flow from their three environments: "The Foyer" (welcome guests) to the "The Living Room" (connect with friends) to the "Kitchen" (intimacy with family).  (See also Andy's January 8&15 2006 messages "A Face in the Crowd" and "Our House" for a description of their church strategy.) All in all, I think this is excellent stuff. 

3. My question is: what do we lose when we become focused?   Under this strategy, a few people set the "clear vision" and other possible purposes are weeded out.  Some might go too far with what the North Point people are saying and try to impose a focus or vision on their people.  "Andy Stanley told me to do this!  I cannot listen to you people because you are not focused on the vision - my vision." 

I listened to a John Ortberg talk on Jesus, Leadership and the Kingdom of God podcast immediately after listening to the North Point material.  Ortberg (quoting Jesus) emphasizes that Christian leaders do not lord their leadership over others.  The North Point leaders don't lord their leadership over people but it is very clear who the leaders are and it is they that set the direction.   

The North Point folks are emphasizing the motto "do less things and you will do those things better."  Most of our churches need to hear this.  And yet we will have further problems if we think that all of the vision and focus are going to come from the top tier of leadership.  In reality at North Point, the leaders do a whole lot of listening to thoughtful and godly "regular" congregation members.  Though the church seems to be led from the senior pastor, in reality Andy is also highly influenced by his conversations with regular folks. 

So let's do both. 

As leaders, let's pay attention to the voices of creative people, prophets, and real people.  We might not always enjoy what they have to say.  It may not be comfortable.  They may not agree with our vision or "focus."  But they may have a point that we haven't seen.  They may need to tell us the truth because we are off-track.  I was tremendously helped to be advised that

Sometimes your critics and the complainers are simply good leaders in disguise who need a place to plug in and unleash their gifts.  The reason they are unhappy is that they know we can do better and they want to help. 

The Old Testament prophets were constantly trying to make sure that the temple priests didn't get so into their rituals, efficiency and duties that they forgot the real point.  I think creative, prophetic, and ordinary-Joe people often help me remember what really matters.  Their criticisms of me often have some validity that I need to pay attention to.

At the same time, the North Point folks remind us that we can't be scattered and confused and unfocused because of every little opinion or criticism.  We can sort through the feedback and focus on what is most important.  So let's listen and focus - that seems to me to be the road toward effective ministry. 

See another post about Andy Stanley here where Andy S. actually commented. 

See also Granger Community Church pastor Mark Waltz's blog on the 7 practices.  Part 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

I rewrote this point on September 14, 2006. 

Is Congregational Singing Seeker-Sensitive?

Last Sunday I visited Willow Creek DuPage, one of Willow Creek's Regional Campuses, which meets at Wheaton Academy.  I actually just made it for the end of the service because I went to another church service first. 

The Willow Creek DuPage room seemed quite full.  All of the rows were 70% full.  400 people perhaps?  After the service, they had lemonade and cookies set out at different tables labeled with different high school names in the area.  The idea is that people can more easily find people who live near them. 

But I had one question.  At the end of the video message by Mike Breaux, the worship leader came up and led three songs.  He invited people to stand and later to clap their hands.  It didn't seem to me like many people were singing.  Then again, I was in the back.  Perhaps many of the people visiting are "seekers" and thus feel uncomfortable singing. 

For this reason I thought that Willow Creek did not invite people to sing very much in their weekend services.  I thought the focus was on performed music as opposed to congregational singing.  Is this still the line of thinking?  Or are Willow Creek and other seeker-driven churches incorporating more congregational singing?  Just curious.

P.S. I'm sorry for not asking the regional pastor this question but I felt bad because I hadn't been at the whole service and he had invited people who were hurting to talk with him.  I threw away my brochure but I have sent an email to the general DuPage regional church email address to see if someone wants to comment. 

I'm also sorry for not carrying my camera and taking a photo.  The law of copyrights with photos is that you usually don't get in trouble if you post your own photos.  So I'll have to do that more often.  This photo is free to use because I found it on stock.xchnge

See my recent post about video venues for more discussion about this concept.