Andy Rowell | Church Leadership Conversations

The research behind my post at Out of Ur: Missional vs. Attractional: Debating the Research

See the post I coauthored with the editors of Leadership Journal at the Out of Ur blog:

Missional vs. Attractional: Debating the Research
What do the numbers say? It depends who you ask.

by Url Scaramanga & Andy Rowell

Summary:

In the comments of a recent post, Scot McKnight, David Fitch, Dan Kimball and Alan Hirsch argued about what the church stats say.  They called for evidence.  So in this post, I lay out some quantitative data that is relevant to the discussion.  (See my Following Dan Kimball's Missional vs. Megachurch conversation to get caught up on the chronology of the discussion).  The evidence I present is not decisive for "either side" but it sheds light on what we know and don't know.  My point is merely that we need to be careful about making broad claims about where the church is growing and declining.  I agree that we need to be reasonably informed about sociology but that our direction comes from theology. 

 

Here are the footnotes that they edited out:

Scott Thumma and Dave Travis, Beyond Megachurch Myths: What We Can Learn from America's Largest Churches (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2007), 124-125.

Stanley Presser and Mark Chaves, "Is Religious Service Attendance Declining?" Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 46 (2007): 417.

Rodney Stark, What Americans Really Believe (Waco: Baylor, 2008), 14.

Scott Thumma and Dave Travis, Beyond Megachurch Myths: What We Can Learn from America's Largest Churches (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2007), 8-9.

Notes about interpreting David Olson's The American Church in Crisis statistics:

As I have noted before, David Olson's research is principally based on statistics from 20 or so denominations.  It tells us something but not necessarily about all churches in the U.S.

The quote in the article from Olson was not suggested by me but by the Leadership Journal editors.  It is from the following piece:

Rebecca Barnes and Lindy Lowry, "The American Church in Crisis", Outreach magazine, May/June 2006.

The claims by Olson are also made in his book:

David T. Olson, The American Church in Crisis: Groundbreaking Research Based on a National Database of over 200,000 Churches (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008).  

Olson tallies together headcounts from denominations and based on that argues that the attendance number is fairly stable but the American population is growing.  First, I do not think his numbers adequately represent independent churches and smaller denominations.  Second, I know of no other researcher who depends on headcounts as Olson does with so little clarification about establishing a comprehensive methodology.  

D. Michael Lindsay, assistant professor of sociology at Rice University, notes in response to Olson's research:

"Counting heads to estimate weekly worship service attendance is far less reliable than estimates based on survey responses . . . For researchers to generalize head counts to the entire adult population, they must be conducted as an exhaustive consensus or a representative sample."

D. Michael Lindsay, "Gallup's Research Remains More Reliable Than Counting Heads," Rev. Magazine (Mar/Apr 2008): 59.

It should be said that I appreciate Olson's research for what it does tell us and I used it in my previous post "Megachurch Misinformation" at Out of Ur.  For example, one can look at the church planting statistics from 10 denominations.  These stats do not tell us about church planting in America comprehensively but give a nice snapshot. 

Additional notes about young adults:

I do not mean in the Out of Ur post to paint a rosy picture of American Christianity.  As Andy Crouch notes in the comments, there is no room for complacency.

Robert Wuthnow points out that frequent church attendance among young adults is down from 31 percent in the 1970s to 25 percent more recently. 

Wuthnow writes,

Specifically, 6 percent of younger adults [age 21-45] in the recent period [1998, 2000, 2002 GSS] claim that they attend religious services more than once a week, compared with 7 percent in the earlier period [1972-1976], and 14 percent in the in the recent period claim they attend every week down from 19 percent previously.  At the other extreme, 20 percent say they never attend, compared with only 14 percent earlier.  How should we think about these changes?  On the one hand, it is important not to exaggerate their significance.  In many ways, younger adults at the start of the twenty-first century are like younger adults in the early 1970s.  If we count as 'regular' attenders, those who participate nearly every week or more often, only a quarter (25 percent) of younger adults can be considered regular attenders now, and fewer than a third (31 percent) were in the early 1970s.  The majority of younger adults either attend religious service rarely, or if they attend more than that, are hardly regular enough to be the core of any congregation.  On the other hand, the fact that regular attenders now characterize only 25 percent of younger adults, whereas this proportion was 31 percent in the 1970s represents a decline that cannot easily be dismissed.

Robert Wuthnow, After the Baby Boomers: How Twenty- and Thirty-Somethings Are Shaping the Future of American Religion (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007), 52-53.

Conclusion:

I love all kinds of churches.  All need to be continually evaluated by good theology. 

As I said in my earlier post Megachurch Misinformation, 

All of us want "more and better disciples of Jesus" (a phrase I first heard from Brian McLaren). In the Church of England, they are talking about a "mixed economy" of "fresh expressions" of church being a good thing--in other words different churches will reach different people. I am hopeful about both missional and megachurch expressions of church.

Related:

See also my posts:

Weekly U.S.A. Church Attendance: The Sociologists Weigh In

and

Following Dan Kimball's Missional vs. Megachurch conversation

and my posts in the Sociology category. 

Following Dan Kimball's Missional vs. Megachurch conversation

Dan Kimball provoked a response with his post at Christianity Today's Leadership Journal blog.  Here is some of the response in chronological order.  You can put in the comments any posts I have missed but put "reaction" comments on one of the other blogs as I intend this post just to be an index.

December 2, 2008

Dan Kimball's Missional Misgivings

Small, indigenous churches are getting lots of attention, but where's the fruit?

Dan is a pastor and author of Emerging Church and They Like Jesus, But Not the Church

Brother Maynard of Winnipeg, Manitoba responded to Dan's article at:

Missional Misgivings, or Missional Misunderstandings?

December 4, 2008

Megachurch Misinformation

Mega or missional? The stats say both are doing well.

by Andy Rowell

See also at my blog:

The research behind my Out of Ur post: Megachurch Misinformation

David Fitch, a pastor and professor at Northern Seminary, responded to Dan's original article at:

THREE QUESTIONS FOR THE ATTRACTIONAL PRACTICIONERS WHO QUESTION THE FRUIT OF MISSIONAL: A Response to Dan Kimball

Erika Haub, a Fuller Seminary grad and lives in LA, also responded:

“The church that came to me”

Julie Clawson, a Wheaton College grad and coordinator of the Emerging Women blog, also responded

Missional Effectiveness

Dan Kimball responded in the comments of the original article:

Comments 31 and 34

and Dan wrote the same comment and clarification at Brother Maynard and David Fitch's blog.

December 5, 2008

Tim Keller, pastor Church of the Redeemer in NYC with 4017 attendance according to the Hartford megachurch database and author of the #1 bestselling apologetics book at Amazon.com The Reason for God, then also commented at David Fitch's blog. 

Jonny Baker over in London, UK also noted the exchange.

when did christianity become a popularity contest?

a rant from julie clawson on missional effectiveness

The Out of Ur posted a video and noted that its most recent issue issue of Leadership Journal Fall 2008 was all about the missional conversation. 

Defining "Missional"

Michael Frost clarifies and increasingly unclear word.

Scot McKnight, professor at North Park puts in his take at his blog:

Weekly Meanderings

Len Hjalmarson - NextReformation notes the the discussion.

Missional vs Mega.. again

Brother Maynard responded again:

The Missional/Attractional Divide: Dan Kimball Unpolarized

December 6, 2008

I posted 60 Theologians on an Ecclesiological Spectrum

December 8, 2008

David Fitch and Tim Keller posted additional comments at Fitch's blog. 

Out of Ur posted: Tim Keller Weighs in on Missional Debate

Fitch posted a new post: The Attractional/Missional Debate Won't Stop: Three Take-Aways

Bill Kinnon: Keller on Fitch on Kimball on Missional Growth?

Meanwhile, Len Hjalmarson reviewed ReJesus by Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost.  Hirsch responded in the comments a dialogue commenced. 

Jamie Arpin-Ricci: Interview With Michael Frost about ReJesus: A Wild Messiah for a Missional Church

December 11

Alan Hirsch Responds to Kimball's "Missional Misgivings"

David Fitch, Scot McKnight, Alan Hirsch and Dan Kimball all left comments

December 12

Defining Missional
The word is everywhere, but where did it come from and what does it really mean?
Alan Hirsch | posted 12/12/2008

From the fall issue of Leadership Journal

Brian Russell

and Jonny Baker

note the article.

Andrew Jones adds his comments at:

Missional and Alan Hirsch

Neil Cole series with lots of comments by Dan Kimball

Misguided Misgivings 1: A Response to Dan Kimball’s Editorial comments

Misguided Misgivings 2: The Walmart Effect

Misguided Misgivings 3: Bigger isn’t Better

Misguided Misgivings 4: Do the math

Misguided Misgivings 5: A cost too high

Misguided Misgivings 6: Here is some fruit...

December 16

Out of Ur: Missional vs. Attractional: Debating the Research - a post by Andy Rowell and the editors of Leadership Journal

See also my post:

The research behind my post at Out of Ur: Missional vs. Attractional: Debating the Research

Here I clarify some of the research that gets discussed in the Out of Ur post.  

December 17

Brad Brisco at the Missional Church Network

Lesslie Newbigin and the GOCN

-- how Darrell Guder and Lesslie Newbigin differ.

The research behind my Out of Ur post: Megachurch Misinformation

See my post today at Leadership Journal's Out of Ur blog:

Megachurch Misinformation: Mega or missional? The stats say both are doing well.

Here are few page numbers in the article that got edited out:

Mark Chaves, "All Creatures Great and Small: Megachurches in Context," Review of Religious Research (2006) 47:329.

Rodney Stark and Roger Finke, Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion (2000), 155. 

David Olson, The American Church in Crisis, (2008),146, 149, 150. 

Update: See my index to follow the whole discussion:

Following Dan Kimball's Missional vs. Megachurch conversation

Jack Welch: Most pastors could never make it in the business world

I have a new post today on Leadership Journal's Out of Ur blog entitled

Are Pastors Competitive Enough?

A CEO says pastors would never make it in the business world, but is that bad?

by Andy Rowell

I comment on a BusinessWeek article by Jack Welch regarding people trying to move from the non-profit world (i.e. church) to the business world. 

Make your comments there!

"A Former Pastor Goes Church Shopping" - my post is up on Leadership Journal's blog Out of Ur

Amy and I have been looking for a church here in Durham, North Carolina after moving here for my Doctor of Theology (Th.D. program) at Duke Divinity School.  I have a new article published on Leadership Journal's blog "Out of Ur."  It is called:

"A Former Pastor Goes Church Shopping: And he wrestles with the advantages and disadvantages of mainline and nondenominational churches."

You can click on the title above and go directly there. 

Make your comments there!

Why are adults in their 20's not connecting into local churches?

Today, I wanted to refer you to two new posts about why young adults are not enjoying and sticking with their parents' churches.  Below I have also talked about how I connected as a college student to a local church and my advice to passionate (and disillusioned) people in their 20's. 

The first post I want to draw your attention to is on Chris Monroe's Paradoxology "Desert Pastor" blog.  Here Chris interviews Sarah Cunningham, author of the brand new book, Dear Church: Letters from a Disillusioned Generation, (Zondervan, August 2006).  (In the comment I asked Sarah about what unique challenges Christian college students face when choosing a church.  Look there and see what she says in response.  She says she went to Taylor's leadership conference as a college student!)  See also the website for the book at http://www.dearchurch.com/ and her myspace page. 

The second post is at Leadership Journal's Out of Ur blog.  Brian McLaren has a post entitled:

Family Faith Feud: Why are young adults not finding their places in their parents’ church?

At Taylor University, our desire is to better and better instill in students a love for the local church.

When I was at Taylor, I was inspired to get involved in a small local church when one of my professors told me: "Be part of a small church.  Just showing up and singing loud will be a blessing to them."  So I did.  I was involved in a little country church of about 30 people.  I had the opportunity to give the pastoral prayer weekly, sing loudly, eat lots of good home-cooking, preach a couple of horrible sermons and give lots of hugs to elderly ladies.  We had a group of 5-10 of us who would go together: wake each other up, pile in the car, turn up the worship music to "prepare," drive home, and eat meals in the Dining Commons together afterward.

But this isn't the only way.  A large church can be great as well.  I think it is fine for students to church hop and shop for 4-5 weeks.  (Sleeping in does not count).  But then pick one (they all have flaws) and go to it every week and get involved.  And it is much more fun if you can get some friends to go with you. 

If a young adult is very passionate about their way of "doing church" (and disillusioned with the local churches they find), perhaps they can channel that passion into helping with a youth group, a campus ministry, or a small church.  In this way, they can experiment with things they are passionate about like: "excellence," "emerging church movement" ideas, or ancient-future spiritual formation practices.  What I am saying is that it is hard as a college student to have a huge impact on the overall functioning of a large church.   But you can channel your passions into different venues where you can give them a trial run and make a huge impact for the kingdom. 

Let's empower daredevil creative (and informed and trained) church planters

Thanks Steve Addison for this delightful and challenging piece entitled:

Fallow Fields: 20 ways to waste time while not planting churches at Leadership Journal's Out of Ur blog.

Ouch!  He shames us by pointing out a whole bunch of ways we slow down and kill church planting.   

May we all not sleep well tonight because we are appropriately disturbed about the excuses we make for not planting churches! Some people point out that one of the most common ways to pray in the Psalms is "Help!" That is how I'm praying tonight: "Lord, help us to do better!"

Addison rightly urges risk and prudence in his comments about church planting. He has obviously seen thoughtless investment and lots of talk with no action.

I was inspired on the risk side by Brian McLaren saying in his Princeton Theological Seminary address entitled "The Church Emerging & Mainline Theological Education." He told a predominantly mainline audience that they should throw their money at creative, pioneering efforts. He said that instead of selling old urban church buildings to raise the endowment to pay for denominational officials, we should be giving that church property to the most creative out of the box folks we can find. They may "fail" but they probably won't truly "fail." (For some people not lasting five years is a "failure." But it is not when we consider the outreach that has taken place. It is only a failure when someone loses their marriage in the process!  So let's take care of the person). 

Let's invest in these creative pioneers who will cultivate fresh ministry models. And if there are wise people like Steve Addison who can help us select the right people and guide them away from common pitfalls, that is all the better!

Being a pastor's wife is sometimes the only way a woman can be involved in church leadership

Another outstanding piece from Lauren Winner at Leadership Journal's Out of Ur blog.  

Married to the Ministry: has the pastor’s wife’s role changed for better or worse?

She says that some women who were not allowed to pastor themselves, married pastors and thus found some fulfillment by engaging in the limited amount of pastoral work expected of a pastor's wife.

I have also seen extremely competent pastorally gifted women who have found their way into roles as "administrative assistant" or church secretary. In another setting, these competent gifted women may have considered seminary and become outstanding pastors themselves. Interestingly, according to 2005-2006 report by the Association of Theological Schools, there are almost as many "Black" women pursuing their Masters of Divinity degree these days as men (2,366 Men and 2,330 Women). However, for "White", the numbers are still quite far apart: 16,268 Men and 6,791 Women.

Other pastorally gifted women have gone into "Christian Education," chaplaincy, or counseling as the acceptable approximations for church ministry. And others struggle wondering what to do with their pastoral gifting when they haven't met the right man and what to do with their time when they are struggling with infertility. (See the journeys of Carolyn Custis James and Gretchen Gaebelein Hull as told in their books).

Sadly for many of our young women growing up in evangelical churches, becoming the pastor's wife still seems like their best shot at being involved in church ministry. The number one nonfiction book on the Christian Bestsellers List for September 2006 is Captivating by John and Stasi Eldredge. As a professor at Taylor University, an evangelical Christian college, I can tell you that young Christian women are reading it in droves. Unfortunately as Agnieszka Tennant points out in her Christianity Today article "What (Not All) Women Want: The finicky femininity of Captivating by John and Stasi Eldredge", the Eldredge's advocate a "tame idea of beauty" - one exemplified by "Pioneer women [who] brought china teacups into the wilderness." There are other ways of being beautiful. I know because I have a pastor's wife who has her MDiv just like me. I'm thrilled to be a pastor's husband.

Lauren Winner is great.  My wife Amy uses her book Real Sex in the Personal Foundations for Ministry course.  Lauren came to Taylor this spring to speak as well.  She is married to a friend of ours from Regent College.

See my post about Captivating here.   

What is the Emerging Church Movement?

I have been asked to brief a fellow professor on the Emerging Church Movement.  Here is how I responded. 

In my opinion, "The Emerging Church Movement" is a description for the new styles of evangelical churches that are being led by younger pastors who are between the ages of 25 and 40 today (who we used to call "Generation Xers").  (There are people younger and older but I’m trying to give you a ballpark sociological description).  Most used to be youth pastors and are now senior pastors.  They are using their youth ministry experience to help create churches that better reach younger people.  Of course any changes in church structure or practice could become heretical and deserve reflection.  But, it seems to me that all of the main "emerging church" writings would easily fall within the boundaries of the National Association of Evangelicals statement of faith.  The most controversial things some emerging church writers have questioned include how to best reach out to homosexuals (see an example from Brian McLaren at Leadership Journals’ Out of Ur blog 1, 2, 3) and whether hell has been biblically taught correctly within evangelicalism (See again McLaren at Out of Ur 1, 2, 3).  In my opinion, these are standard conversations within evangelicalism.  (As you can see, they are happening on Christianity Today’s website). 

As theological educators, I think we should view it this way:

the emerging church proponents = innovative evangelical youth pastors

They will make some mistakes in their enthusiasm for changes and relevance but they are trying their best to reach young adults and teens.  These are not enemies to argue with but rather people to cheer on, put your arm around, and offer guidance.  They will also challenge us in good ways and keep our churches fresh. 

Below I have provided some resources.  Let me know if you have questions or concerns.   

andy

Resouces:

The proper term is "The Emerging Church Movement" not "emergence" or "emergent."  And it does fit the sociological definition of a "movement."  The "Emergent Village" is the most organized group within the movement.  You can read their "statement of faith" which they call an "order" here.

You can read a decent description at Wikipedia on "Emerging Church."  (Wikipedia is a user generated encyclopedia that anyone can edit and both critics and supporters of the emerging church have basically agreed upon this description). 

The best scholarly book on the subject is:

Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures
by Eddie Gibbs, Ryan K. Bolger

Baker Academic (November 1, 2005)

You will be interested to know as well that the highly respected Trinity Evangelical Divinity School New Testament professor D.A. Carson has written a book that is mostly critical of the movement. 

Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church : Understanding a Movement and Its Implications
by D. A. Carson

Zondervan (May 1, 2005)

Carson tries to analyze the movement by analyzing Brian McLaren's epistemology.  It is a theological and philosophical analysis of what is really a practical phenomenon.   

See especially North Park New Testament professor Scot McKnight’s review of D.A. Carson’s Becoming Emergent with the Emerging Church

Parts: 1 2  3  4 5  6  7  8  Final issues: 1 1a 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Or if those links don't work, the first eight parts are here. 

Here is Scot McKnight’s description of the emerging church: 

What is the Emerging Church?

What is the Emerging Church? Protest

What is the Emerging Church? Postmodernity

What is the Emerging Church? Pro-Aplenty

I have my students read a book about the emerging church in Program and Curriculum Development.  They compare it to the megachurch movement.  We look at them as both influential church models within evangelicalism.

 

Media and Preaching

A fellow professor e mailed me this question:

I'm looking for a book that can help explain the communicational importance of using electronic support during worship. Any ideas you have for me to peruse would be appreciated.

Here is what I said:

Check out these in this order. You can see my notes below.

High-Tech Worship?: Using Presentational Technologies Wisely (Paperback) by Quentin J. Schultze

Publisher: Baker Books (January 2004)

Schultze was in my class this year because he has been a visiting scholar at Taylor. This book is short and wise and would fit your purpose I think.

Communicating for a Change : Seven Keys to Irresistible Communication (Hardcover) by Andy Stanley, Lane Jones

Publisher: Multnomah (June 1, 2006)

Andy is one of the leading communicators in the nation. (He is speaking at Willow Creek's Leadership Conference this year). This is his new book.

The Hidden Power of Electronic Culture : How Media Shapes Faith, the Gospel, and Church (Emergentys) (Paperback) by Shane Hipps

Publisher: Zondervan/Youth Specialties (February 1, 2006)

Taylor communication professor and my friend Kathy Bruner is reading this book. She says it is good. He has been on Leadership Journal's Out of Ur recently. See my blog post responding to his article about Video Venues here.

-- The rest of these books I don't know much about. Abingdon (of United Methodist roots) has published all of them.

· The Wired Church: Making Media Ministry (Paperback) by Len Wilson

Publisher: Abingdon Press; Bk&CD Rom edition (March 1999)

· Digital Storytellers: The Art of Communicating the Gospel in Worship (Paperback) by Len Wilson, Jason Moore

Publisher: Abingdon Press; Bk & DVD edition (April 2002)

· Media Ministry Made Easy: A Practical Guide to Visual Communication (Paperback) by Tim Eason

Publisher: Abingdon Press; Bk & DVD edition (April 2003)

· The Spectacle of Worship in a Wired World: Electronic Culture and the Gathered People of God (Paperback) by Tex Sample

Publisher: Abingdon Press (September 1998)

---I have a few other books about how to use movies in teaching here.

Video Venues and the Future Shrinking of the Megachurch

On Leadership Journal's Out of Ur blog, they are having a discussion about video venues based on the post by Shane Hipps entitled "Video Venues and the Papacy of Celebrity: Why changing the methods always changes the message." What is a video venue?

The best way to describe a video venue is to give you an example.

Willow Creek McHenry County is located more than 30 minutes from Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, IL. McHenry County campus pastor, Wayne Alguire, attends the Saturday night service at the main campus. Afterward, he is given a DVD of the sermon. On Sunday morning, he plays that DVD during the preaching portion of the service in McHenry country. "What," you ask, "they do not have live person preaching?" No, they don't. They have "live" worship and announcements but not preaching. On occasion, there may be an exception but in general this is the basic idea. Wayne Alguire does not have to prepare a sermon each week and is thus freed to care for people. The congregation does not have to drive all the way to the main campus in South Barrington. They can get amazing preaching in their own backyard. That is the basic idea of video venues.

Here are a few of my thoughts (pro and con) about this approach.

PRO:

I like the idea that megachurches are in some ways getting smaller and homier through this approach. In other words, rather than driving from McHenry Country to Willow Creek and not seeing anyone you recognize, you can hear Bill Hybels on video at the Wheaton campus with a smaller group who you will begin to get to know.

I also dislike bad preaching. Bill Hybels says in his preaching/teaching workshop something like, “If you’re not good at teaching/preaching, save your listeners, and go do something else.” I’d choose a good sermon on video over terrible sermons in person any day.

It is worth noting that the microphone changed church culture more than video. Before that, we were limited by the strength of the preacher's voice, the acoustics of the room, and the youth of the audience's ears. No wonder there weren't many megachurches.

CON:

Due to overemphasis on the Eucharist/communion in the Roman Catholic Church, the Reformers put more emphasis on the sermon. I think we have swung the other direction and put too much emphasis on the sermon to the detriment of congregational life. The logical extension of the crucial nature of “good preaching” is to get it "efficiently" by playing sermons on video.

The logical end of the VV "efficiency" argument is to pick two preachers and just have everyone listen to them. How about my favorites Rob Bell and John Ortberg as the two?

I think there is already too much borrowing and imitating in evangelicalism. It is remarkable how much of what thousands of churches do is rooted in the actions and programs of five influential churches.  (Later note August 1, 2007: These rankings by The Church Report are probably not legitimate).
What is really scary about that exaggerated scenario is that few of us would be studying our Bibles as studiously if we didn't have to preach! That is human nature, right? There is something about the local pastor studying and applying the Scripture to a specific context.

The Future of the Video Venue:

I don't think we need to worry about everyone going to the video venue approach. Some people will appreciate it and the approach will continue to grow through the megachurches. Others though will want a live preacher that they can interact with.

Interestingly, this approach may be the sign of the waning of the megachurch movement. People don't want to drive 40 minutes to go to a church. They want to get to know people who live in their community. I bet that Willow Creek will never build a bigger auditorium than the one it opened two years ago. Church planters, and other advocates of the power of the small church, should feel vindicated that even the megachurch is noticing that bigger is not necessarily better. There is power in local churches who contextualize themselves to a community.

Calvin College professor, Quentin J. Schultze, reflects well on these issues in: High-Tech Worship?: Using Presentational Technologies Wisely. Baker, 2004.

If you are interested in this topic, you might be interested in listening to an audio presentation on this topic from Leadership Network at
http://www.leadnet.org/Resources_AV.asp

Here is the description:
Seacoast Church (www.seacoast.org) currently has 9 different campuses, and it continues to pray and plan toward the launch of more campuses. The primary teaching comes from our Mt. Pleasant campus by videocast. This model prompts questions about whether a teaching pastor in one city can effectively pastor people hundreds of miles away. The answer is no, and in the accompanying podcast lead pastor Greg Surratt explains Seacoast's approach and rationale.

Some photos of Saddleback's Video Venues are here.

There is a video venue starter kit from North Coast Church in San Diego here.

The President & The Pastor at Out of Ur

They have posted part one and part two of my article The President & The Pastor: lessons from George W. Bush’s brave/reckless leadership style at Leadership Journal's Out of Ur blog.

Image Isn’t Everything: the uneasy conscience of a GenX pastor

See my article (Part 1: "Image Isn’t Everything: the uneasy conscience of a GenX Pastor" here and Part 2" "Image Isn’t Everything 2: depth and transparency offer hope for GenX" here) that is being published in two parts at Leadership Journal's blog Out of Ur. I wrote it in 2004 as the founder and leader of a GenX ministry at Granville Chapel in Vancouver, British Columbia.

It bears similarities to my post about Andy Stanley and Leadership here.

I hope you can overlook my use of the term "Gen-X pastor." This term is rarely used anymore and very few people believe in the Generation X distinction. Willow Creek has a "Next Gen" Leadership Conference. I like that better. You can see my post about the Emerging Churches book by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger for more discussion about the confusing terms “emerging” and “emergent.”

I also affirm that this image issue is not limited to pastors in their 20’s and 30’s. My post simply tries to identify some of the issues I noticed in myself and my friends and how we have tried to address them.

Andy Stanley Says There is No Such Thing as Distinctively Spiritual Leadership

Here are my comments on the article: Is Ministry Leadership Different? Andy Stanley and Jim Collins in an unexpected point-counterpoint by Eric Reed at Leadership Journal's Out of Ur blog:

Andy Stanley, pastor of the third most influential church in the nation with more than 18,000 in attendance, is right in urging pastors to practice competent leadership regardless of its source. He says: “I grew up in a culture where everything was overly spiritualized . . . A principle is a principle, and God created all the principles.” He is right in saying that too often churches have permitted abuse, waste, and ineptitude in the name of forgiveness, family, and niceness. He is also right in declaring it makes sense to learn from others. We should be reexamining Scripture for wisdom as well as sifting through leadership and business management books for wise insight. (See my list of recommended business management books that are helpful for pastors here).

But Christian leaders are different from other leaders because of their Christian character (as Andy tacitly indicates in his words about the importance of prayer, counsel, and integrity when he speaks to church leaders). If leaders are not formed by Scripture, prayer and counsel [Eugene Peterson calls these the three angles in his book Working the Angles)], their vision and leadership will ultimately be shallow and self-serving. So I think Andy overstates the case when he says “There’s nothing distinctly spiritual [about the kind of leadership I do].” There is such a thing as spiritual (pleasing-to-the-Holy-Spirit) leadership that is often different from secular business leadership. Spiritual formation will actually change the way we do leadership. Some practices which would violate Scripture cannot be used even to meet seemingly good goals. In other words, Scripture restrains the use of some means. The ends do not always justify the means.

Eric Reed is right in pointing out that many young people are attracted to Andy Stanley but that he does not fit with the “emerging” leader profile which is also popular among young people. Reed writes:

“Stanley is becoming the model for the next generation of large church pastors [note Reed’s adjective large] . . . Because Andy connects well with younger leaders, who in general are bent more toward spiritual formation than church growth . . . I thought I’d hear something that backed up the pendulum swing we have heard prominent emerging leaders identify--that younger leaders don’t buy all the church growth stuff, that the models that built megachurches worked for boomers, but for Gen-X and younger? Fuggidaboudit.”

Many young suburban white young adults are attracted to Andy Stanley. He is what they want to be: attractive, making-a-difference, young, confident, and articulate with a gorgeous facility and a talented staff. But Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger describe in Emerging Churches a different set of young people who don’t want to copy management principles or accept megachurch assumptions. They want to emulate Jesus’ practices – wandering around talking to people, without a building, praying, telling stories, and helping people. Seeker churches like Stanley’s, on the other hand, want people to “meet Jesus” through getting them through whatever means to sit in the seats of their church.

My comments on the Gibbs and Bolger book Emerging Churches are here.

Most of the college students in my classes at Taylor University are attracted to both Andy Stanley and the Emerging church conversation. They are attracted to young charismatic leaders regardless of their ministry approach. Rob Bell and Erwin McManus are probably the two most popular among them since they have all the things Andy Stanley has (attractive, making-a-difference, young, confident, and articulate with a large facility and a talented staff) but also embrace some of aspects of the emerging churches: art, attitude, informality, stories, urban culture, and justice.

See my list of sermon audio links to listen to Stanley, Bell and McManus here.

For a scholarly presentation of how the apostle Paul dealt with secular ideas of leadership when they began to appear in Corinth, listen to New Testament scholar Bruce Winter's lecture "Secularization of First Century Christian Leadership - Inroads of Secular Models." Here is the synopsis.

Bruce Winter questions the word "leader" as the name we use when talking about church ministers. He says Paul intentionally does not use the Greek word for leader to describe the ministers in the early church. Winter also says Paul intentionally rejected the braggart, money-making, attractive orator image that was readily apparent in the culture at the time.

This must cause all of us to pause as we think of the kind of Christian leaders that are so often held up as "making a difference" in our culture. Most often they get famous as successful pastors because they are great speakers and attractive. Perhaps this is always the way to fame and there is no preventing it. But that does not mean we need to try to emulate the famous (as is so natural).

Jeffrey Fox lays out "the rules to rise to the top of any organization" in How to Become CEO. Here are a few out of the 75.

• Keep Physically Fit
• Dress for a Dance
• Be Visible
• Learn to Speak and Write in Plain English
• Say Things to Make People Feel Good
• Look Sharp and Be Sharp
• The Concept Doesn't Have to Be Perfect But the Execution of It Does

I am quite sure that Fox is right that if we applied these we could rise to the top of any organization including the church. The Corinthians would have sent Paul the book. "Work on your appearance, Paul. Don't do manual labor. Charge higher fees. Try to be a bit more polished."

We could work on those things or instead we could learn to pray the Psalms.

1 Sam 16:7. But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The LORD does not look at the things human beings look at. People look at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart" (TNIV).

May God give us wisdom to do our tasks well - gathering wisdom wherever we may find it - from secular and Christian mentors and books. But may God also form us as people after his own heart so that we do the right tasks in the right way.