That's what matters most and today has been full of people and Communion. It's been another fag paper day and things were again running tight, but they all fitted together and I found myself ended and back home by around six pm. Made the conscious decision to draw stumps by sea and call it a day, walking away from the study and watching the TV for a change, snuggled up and chilling to a comedy play and then an action film before making it to bed.
What has been most amazing today is the fact that I have managed to engage with so many people on a one-to-one basis in the one day. I love it when a day becomes filled with people and to listen to their stories about families, church and life is such a privilege. To extend the spiritual walls and to celebrate the love of a God who cares and came to save us from ourselves in our simple Passover meal never loses it's appeal of effect.
There are a number of people I'll at the moment and as the snow falls silently outside, covering the scars and the ugliness of our creation it is hard to to think of how God covers our sins and redeems us, turning an ugliness into beauty, using an awful event to create something beautiful in and for us.
The joy of seeing, and having confirmed, the real changes experienced in lives through the move of God's Holy Spirit. So often we ask, or are asked, for things empirical and yet when it is seen, how often to we stop to applaud, give thanks and be just a little moved by it? Lord, I love the way You influence lives and bring the most amazing changes through the simplest act of prayer and the affirmation of belonging that the presence of another confers.
The key to being Christian is totally wrapped up in incarnacy. God becomes fully man to reconcile us to Himself and it is in this that we are redeemed. In Jesus, the Christ, we see obedience; the putting first the many rather than self and it is here that the key is found. It is the breaking of bread and making the Christ known which turns that key and it is in being engaged and actively involved with the person before us, that image of the invisible God made visible, which sees the door open and the light rush in to even the darkest of places.
It's not 'if you build it they will come' but rather 'if we are with them they will have arrived'!
The Word became flesh and dwelt among us - and people respond to that coming among them. Too often we make Church about coming to see the show, begging them to see, hear, feel, and enjoy having their ears tickled with what they want. We feed the very same consumer society that we claim to separate ourselves from. Church, if we are honest, is for many of us (clergy and lay), about brining a 'popular' church. Senior staff have never asked me about how blessed, prayerful or engaged with the community we are in our iteration of Christ's Bride. They ask about numbers and crave the 'how many and how much' that permits them to measure their success to those around them (and especially perhaps those above - can I say that? Should I say that?).
Church is about being successful not being sacred. Our liturgy is failing and becoming limp as we seek to make it accessible and shorten it and fall into the trap that it and worship are two different things; and having condemned our liturgy to the label words, we reach for our Rend Collective songbook and play our tambourines for the masses in the hope they will dance!!! (I like Rend Collective by the way - not a knock at them)
Lord for those with whom I have been Church today, I thank You.
For those who have met with God and been touched by His presence and all that confers, and all that this affirms, today. I bless Your holy name.
Lord, help me to be the man You call me to be; the man for whom the Christ died, and never count the cost. To never wear a watch that I might be ruled by time rather than the need before me but to wear instead a smile and to affirm others (even in those stories heard perhaps again and again) with love and compassion.
For the many needs before me today I look to You, the God who answers by fire, and who speaks into our lives in the gentlest of whispers. Be God in the lives of those who sit in solitude, who recline in pain and confusion, who walk in the shadow of death.
Lord, I love you.
Running total (this is something I've been asked to do for an average week by someone looking at their own call - it is neither a boast or a complaint but merely just what it is)
Comm: 75
Hrs 44
telephone: 114
Texts: 94
Email: 143
Showing posts with label numbers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label numbers. Show all posts
Friday, 13 January 2017
Monday, 29 June 2015
Church Growth strategies: 'Messy Church!!'
Still keeping on with Hauerwas' thought that:
and having considered just some of the many strategies for church growth I've encountered thus far, we return to that most lauded and even more often wrongly places element of church growth: The 'messy church' approach!
One of the more intriguing things about this, and there are many that intrigue me, is the fact that many of those who 'do' it don't actually catch on to what it is all about. So let's start with three things that I think it actually is:
i. It is 'church'. This means that it is a body of people who come together to hear the word, to break bread together in a 'fellowship meal' *, to sing praise and to enjoy being part of a fully sacramental community**
ii. It is about bringing families into a place (which might not be a 'church') where there are activities and fun and food and friendship on offer - yeah, not like Sundays at all then is it?
iii. It focusses on reconciliation to God through the cross of Jesus, the Christ - But it is not about claiming scalps. We do it to share God's love, not pay the parish share or 'bring children in' (but of course it will do that too, but that's not the goal).
Not 'messy evangelism'
One of things that really winds me up is people coming to me and complaining thus:
'We've been doing messy church for over a year and no one has come to the other services!'
It's not supposed to be the means by which we bring the people in and then, once they're comfortable in the place, repot them in the Sunday services like young plants taken from the greenhouse! It is evangelism, but not the sort that builds up your ageing and largely failing Sunday gatherings. The messy folk might come to have a look at a Sunday but wherever and whenever the messy church takes place: That's church for them!
Having told this to some church groups I've been met with the response, 'So what's in it for us then?'
The answer is simple: 'You're building the Church (universal) and not the local expression of it in your building. You are being obedient and going into all the world and making disciples and all that stuff!'
As usual with Church. It isn't rocket science!
Not an overnight success
Well it hasn't been where I am anyway!
Messy church is hard work because you need:
i. People who will be praying for it (and during it too is good),
ii. People who will plan and lead and cater and assist and wash and clean and be there to become familiar faces and to be 'friends' (this means actually being friends but he way, not just pretending to be such).
iii. People who will keep on doing i. and ii. for a jolly long time - through the feast and the famine times - as faithful and committed members of the project.
iv. A church (or group of people) who are willing to fund the thing (but I believe there should always be a charge for the event - this is important) for as long as it needs funding.
Messy church is about servanthood and sacrificial giving (of time, money and self) - it is great fun and one of the most rewarding things I have done with families ever.
Some points to ponder
Paying and messy church
I've met some who claim that asking people to pay to come to messy church is wrong. I don't think so because it starts people off on the right foot with them realising that there are bill to be paid and costs met and Church doesn't have bottomless pockets. It's good value and good practice we need to be looking at here. (I must add the caveat that where there is financial hardship then costs should be reduced or removed - but making people feel like a charity case often sees them leave, never to return). (whoops - was moving this and forgot to paste it) . . . The thing is that if we see messy church as a fresh expression (FE) then we need to start as we ought to go on, for those who make up the Church are also responsible for making sure it pays its way. I have met many who tell me that ALL FEs should be paid for by the diocese or the church who are organising it, or someone else, because, like children, 'They didn't ask to be brought into the world so why should they pay?'
The answer to this is that everyone who brings their families to messy church ( and this is every that I've met who have said this) have told me that they pay for other sessional activities for their kids but messy church is THE best value (one of those who said this paid a fiver for 'parents and toddler's' and other groups) - £3 for a whole family: Mum, dad and three kids - they want to pay towards the thing.
And back to the 'parent and child' debate: As parents I am aware that we need to teach our children to pay their way and to learn that if they want things then those things need to be paid for. This is good parenting and is what we do in other expressions of Church: we call it a gift, tithe or offering in that context though, don't we?
Leaving unattended children at messy church
Another issue is that of letting the parents leave the children at messy church. This one of the big problems and whilst, should there be a pastoral need, I'm happy to see it happen occasionally when a crisis arises, we don't offer messy church as free (see above) or cheap childcare. It is Church and therefore needs to be engaged with as such.
There - that's the missing bit repasted!
Doing what works or doing the same old stuff?
Some of the messy church setups I've visited have been doing the same thing for years and they can't see anything wrong with that because it worked when they started. One even offered the same fare (pizza!) and assumed that pizza and chips was what children liked and had never thought of cooking shepherd's pie, pasta and other things. Don't get stuck in a rut - be inventive with your crafts, flexible with your formats and adventurous with the food (and if you do a beef wellington - call me).
When and where to do messy church
Times and places should be the time people can come and the place they can easy come to. There are so many people who think that by making the venue 'their church' is a great way to 'add to their church' - but it isn't (and isn't why we do it). Add to this the fact that some like to do it on a Sunday because, as one churchwarden told me, 'Adds children and numbers to the ASA!' If I had my way I'd exclude messy church from the ASA altogether and make it an evangelistic end in itself rather than a means of justifying the church by numbers (we had 30 adults and 7 children at the Sunday communion yesterday by the way - the numbers are small but the gathering was wonderful. The numbers condemn us as a small church - the fellowship confirms us as valid Church. All about perspective).
The point of what we do is to communicate the Gospel and make Jesus, the Christ, known. We do this safe in the knowledge that He in turn will make the Father known and bring about reconciliation with Him and us. It isn't rocket science, is it?
This is where messy church becomes something of inestimable value.
'Church growth strategies are the death rattle of a church that has lost its way.'
and having considered just some of the many strategies for church growth I've encountered thus far, we return to that most lauded and even more often wrongly places element of church growth: The 'messy church' approach!
One of the more intriguing things about this, and there are many that intrigue me, is the fact that many of those who 'do' it don't actually catch on to what it is all about. So let's start with three things that I think it actually is:
i. It is 'church'. This means that it is a body of people who come together to hear the word, to break bread together in a 'fellowship meal' *, to sing praise and to enjoy being part of a fully sacramental community**
ii. It is about bringing families into a place (which might not be a 'church') where there are activities and fun and food and friendship on offer - yeah, not like Sundays at all then is it?
iii. It focusses on reconciliation to God through the cross of Jesus, the Christ - But it is not about claiming scalps. We do it to share God's love, not pay the parish share or 'bring children in' (but of course it will do that too, but that's not the goal).
Not 'messy evangelism'
One of things that really winds me up is people coming to me and complaining thus:
'We've been doing messy church for over a year and no one has come to the other services!'
It's not supposed to be the means by which we bring the people in and then, once they're comfortable in the place, repot them in the Sunday services like young plants taken from the greenhouse! It is evangelism, but not the sort that builds up your ageing and largely failing Sunday gatherings. The messy folk might come to have a look at a Sunday but wherever and whenever the messy church takes place: That's church for them!
Having told this to some church groups I've been met with the response, 'So what's in it for us then?'
The answer is simple: 'You're building the Church (universal) and not the local expression of it in your building. You are being obedient and going into all the world and making disciples and all that stuff!'
As usual with Church. It isn't rocket science!
Not an overnight success
Well it hasn't been where I am anyway!
Messy church is hard work because you need:
i. People who will be praying for it (and during it too is good),
ii. People who will plan and lead and cater and assist and wash and clean and be there to become familiar faces and to be 'friends' (this means actually being friends but he way, not just pretending to be such).
iii. People who will keep on doing i. and ii. for a jolly long time - through the feast and the famine times - as faithful and committed members of the project.
iv. A church (or group of people) who are willing to fund the thing (but I believe there should always be a charge for the event - this is important) for as long as it needs funding.
Messy church is about servanthood and sacrificial giving (of time, money and self) - it is great fun and one of the most rewarding things I have done with families ever.
Some points to ponder
Paying and messy church
I've met some who claim that asking people to pay to come to messy church is wrong. I don't think so because it starts people off on the right foot with them realising that there are bill to be paid and costs met and Church doesn't have bottomless pockets. It's good value and good practice we need to be looking at here. (I must add the caveat that where there is financial hardship then costs should be reduced or removed - but making people feel like a charity case often sees them leave, never to return). (whoops - was moving this and forgot to paste it) . . . The thing is that if we see messy church as a fresh expression (FE) then we need to start as we ought to go on, for those who make up the Church are also responsible for making sure it pays its way. I have met many who tell me that ALL FEs should be paid for by the diocese or the church who are organising it, or someone else, because, like children, 'They didn't ask to be brought into the world so why should they pay?'
The answer to this is that everyone who brings their families to messy church ( and this is every that I've met who have said this) have told me that they pay for other sessional activities for their kids but messy church is THE best value (one of those who said this paid a fiver for 'parents and toddler's' and other groups) - £3 for a whole family: Mum, dad and three kids - they want to pay towards the thing.
And back to the 'parent and child' debate: As parents I am aware that we need to teach our children to pay their way and to learn that if they want things then those things need to be paid for. This is good parenting and is what we do in other expressions of Church: we call it a gift, tithe or offering in that context though, don't we?
Leaving unattended children at messy church
Another issue is that of letting the parents leave the children at messy church. This one of the big problems and whilst, should there be a pastoral need, I'm happy to see it happen occasionally when a crisis arises, we don't offer messy church as free (see above) or cheap childcare. It is Church and therefore needs to be engaged with as such.
There - that's the missing bit repasted!
Doing what works or doing the same old stuff?
Some of the messy church setups I've visited have been doing the same thing for years and they can't see anything wrong with that because it worked when they started. One even offered the same fare (pizza!) and assumed that pizza and chips was what children liked and had never thought of cooking shepherd's pie, pasta and other things. Don't get stuck in a rut - be inventive with your crafts, flexible with your formats and adventurous with the food (and if you do a beef wellington - call me).
When and where to do messy church
Times and places should be the time people can come and the place they can easy come to. There are so many people who think that by making the venue 'their church' is a great way to 'add to their church' - but it isn't (and isn't why we do it). Add to this the fact that some like to do it on a Sunday because, as one churchwarden told me, 'Adds children and numbers to the ASA!' If I had my way I'd exclude messy church from the ASA altogether and make it an evangelistic end in itself rather than a means of justifying the church by numbers (we had 30 adults and 7 children at the Sunday communion yesterday by the way - the numbers are small but the gathering was wonderful. The numbers condemn us as a small church - the fellowship confirms us as valid Church. All about perspective).
The point of what we do is to communicate the Gospel and make Jesus, the Christ, known. We do this safe in the knowledge that He in turn will make the Father known and bring about reconciliation with Him and us. It isn't rocket science, is it?
__________________________________
The way that we do this is to become incarnate; that is to be present 'in the flesh'. and be real and grounded in reality for those around us. Being 'present' means that we are able to offer friendship and support and also be part of the solution (which means point to the solution rather than actually just be it for people - all about the give a fish/teach them to fish principle).This is where messy church becomes something of inestimable value.
__________________________________
* I've met some people who want to offer 'a communion' from day one but to do so is to encourage people to enter into something they don't quite understand and to cheapen the Eucharist and diminish the importance of it for those who come and those who put it on too!
** All we have in terms of sacrament is (according to Cranmer) is 'bath and bread' - and these should be on offer in this, as in every, church setting. Messy baptism and confirmation should all be on the menu when the time is right :-)
Tuesday, 26 November 2013
Getting them into Church - it's not enough!!
Had a great discussion with someone who was trying to convince me that 'getting people into the church building (especially with regard to Christmas) was enough!'
I tried, rather unsuccessfully, to convince them that whilst it was indeed good to get the people in, it counted for little other than a round of applause from those who wanted to count the number of people through the doors and perhaps those who assume that these convert into some form of income!
It doesn't matter how many people we drag through the doors if we fail to preach Christ - Baby, Bloke, Broken and how He was raised again FOR US!
If Immanuel (God with us) become merely 'carol time' and if Advent is set aside for Argostide then what on earth are we playing at?
But try as I might (and believe me, I did try) I couldn't get past the fact that what made a successful Christmas for this church (if I'm not mistaken) was that Christmas - it's all about numbers!
Oh yeah - and that Hallmark tableau moment when the kids, dressed for the part, have their photo's taken the grandparents sniff at the sight.
I tried, rather unsuccessfully, to convince them that whilst it was indeed good to get the people in, it counted for little other than a round of applause from those who wanted to count the number of people through the doors and perhaps those who assume that these convert into some form of income!
It doesn't matter how many people we drag through the doors if we fail to preach Christ - Baby, Bloke, Broken and how He was raised again FOR US!
If Immanuel (God with us) become merely 'carol time' and if Advent is set aside for Argostide then what on earth are we playing at?
But try as I might (and believe me, I did try) I couldn't get past the fact that what made a successful Christmas for this church (if I'm not mistaken) was that Christmas - it's all about numbers!
Tuesday, 19 March 2013
Finding encouragement in numbers!
One of the biggest problems I encounter in the Missioner role is that of numbers, for people are always trying to peg you down to ASA (Average Sunday Attendance), USA (Usual Sunday Attendance) and other 'performance indicators'.
As we have completed the process of getting a new electoral roll sorted I wondered what it showed and whether there was anything to be gleaned from the numbers, and amazingly it seems that there are in that:
Two thirds of those on the electoral roll are resident in the church district (and 87% live within the parish);
Eighty-four percent (84%) of those one the electoral roll live less than 1km from the church building and some two thirds live within 500m of the church building.
One of the desired outcomes was that the church becomes engaged and effective in the community and functions as a community church - I have to say that tonight I am rather encouraged to see that this is becoming the case.
Not a big church but a big heart and an active and engaged church family - a privilege to work with and be part of it :-)
Nice to find numbers that can make one smile!
As we have completed the process of getting a new electoral roll sorted I wondered what it showed and whether there was anything to be gleaned from the numbers, and amazingly it seems that there are in that:
Two thirds of those on the electoral roll are resident in the church district (and 87% live within the parish);
Eighty-four percent (84%) of those one the electoral roll live less than 1km from the church building and some two thirds live within 500m of the church building.
One of the desired outcomes was that the church becomes engaged and effective in the community and functions as a community church - I have to say that tonight I am rather encouraged to see that this is becoming the case.
Not a big church but a big heart and an active and engaged church family - a privilege to work with and be part of it :-)
Nice to find numbers that can make one smile!
Monday, 4 March 2013
What Makes church valid? (post the third)
Over the past years I have continually been assailed by some whose key indicator of a church's validity has been the ability to pay. That same old same old assessment that:
Pax
ps. Thank You for the comments and emails I have received regarding the 'valid church' posts - extremely helpful and for those whose pain I both understand and feel - be assured of my prayers)
Those who can pay can have - those who cannot pay cannot have!
And I have never disputed that we all need to pay our way and make ends meet but I have said, on many an occasion, that there are also charity, mission and the impact of that congregation under the microscope on the people and community it was established to serve.
All too often we (the Church) appear to be more taken up with numbers than we are the Gospel and making it known.
Whenever clergy meet other clergy or encounter those from 'head office' it appears almost mandatory that the question, 'And what's your ASA or how many do you have in your church?' will arise.
All too often I meet with people who want to look at a Mission Action Plans (MAPs) or get their church into mission with the prime mover eventually coming down to numbers rather than a desire to be effective. Now I don't care what gets the church moving as long as it gets moving, but we have a Gospel to proclaim (a good opening for a song there I reckon) and when we focus on numbers we struggle to focus on Jesus, the cross and restoration of relationship with God - and that's what is central, not numbers (unless you're thinking of how many times we are forgiven and likewise forgive).
That said I do have to (quite hypocritically perhaps) have to admit that there are some numbers that I think do matter; one of these being the percentage of a church's congregation that is effective and engaged. My reason for placing import here is that the those who are 'doing' are also (usually) 'owning' what is happening and the only way we will make our message real and known is by a real 'all member ministry' model. I don't mean those who are directed and treated as drones but those who do what they do in partnership with others. Where the whole body is connected to the next member and the whole acts in concord with the individual. (1 Cor 12: 'Now the body is not made up of one part but of many.' springs to mind)
This is one of the elements that makes church (and Church) valid and leads to perhaps the first part of the definition I am seeking to create:
A truly active all-member ministry where the person with the ultimate responsibility is primus inter pares (first among equals) rather than the monarch (despotic or benign) which seeks to celebrate Christ in the midst and make Him known outside of the body.
Pax
ps. Thank You for the comments and emails I have received regarding the 'valid church' posts - extremely helpful and for those whose pain I both understand and feel - be assured of my prayers)
Monday, 7 January 2013
Church Report (2): sets low standard - fails to achieve?
Continuing with this topic with regard to church planting and pioneer ministry:
One of the worst situations I happen across is those people who are doing pioneer ministry or church planting because, almost always, what I find is a bunch of people who complain that 'the Church' should be paying for everything and that it is unfair to expect them to raise money from the new body of believers that they are raising up.
And of course they are wrong - regardless of what or how - wrong, wrong (and once more for emphasis), wrong!
My big black book tells me that where my treasure is also where my heart will be!
Experience with church (and many other groups which people join) tells me that where people put their heart, passion and belong is the place where they put their treasure to support it.
A church plant has to have a some well-defined goals which lead them into being:
a sacramental body where bread and bath are an important part of its being,
a Bible believing, orthodox faith regardless of the setting it is in,
a Christ-centred, Trinitarian body which, in company with the Son worships the Father through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit,
a place where sound, grounded and inculturated preaching, teaching and discipleship can be found,
a welcoming, inclusive* and pastorally sensitive (and able) place where all are 'family',
a body that joins with others congregations in partnership and shared mission (so many appear to want to be 'special' and remain apart from the body that planted it - it is a plant not a split!), and
a body that pays its way and supports itself (with the desire to be able to support others at some stage).
So many people tell me that they don't have enough people to pay and that asking them to cover the costs of what goes on is a deterrent when it comes to growth. Now I support this view and think that we need to accept that planting a church is indeed a costly affair. Those who send also have to fund (and some will argue that providing a paid for minister is enough evidence of that) and this means that there has to be some casting of the sending church's bread upon the water
BUT
the goal and (more importantly) desire has to be that the body becomes self-sustaining and mature. That the new church (that's the people) sees converts come through to maturity and become leaders and in time bring more converts - not to satisfy a desire for numbers but because they want to share the Good News and see people released into the true freedom that being a person of faith (and that faith looking to Christ and the Cross) brings.
We all have to balance our books - we all have to pay for our gas, electric, water, parish share, toilet rolls and other stuff - especially tea )which reminds me that it must be time for a final cuppa before I head out for a wonderfully full day of ministry and madness.
Happy New Year and for all those teachers out there - enjoy the new term and be of good cheer for Easter's coming!
One of the worst situations I happen across is those people who are doing pioneer ministry or church planting because, almost always, what I find is a bunch of people who complain that 'the Church' should be paying for everything and that it is unfair to expect them to raise money from the new body of believers that they are raising up.
And of course they are wrong - regardless of what or how - wrong, wrong (and once more for emphasis), wrong!
My big black book tells me that where my treasure is also where my heart will be!
Experience with church (and many other groups which people join) tells me that where people put their heart, passion and belong is the place where they put their treasure to support it.
A church plant has to have a some well-defined goals which lead them into being:
a sacramental body where bread and bath are an important part of its being,
a Bible believing, orthodox faith regardless of the setting it is in,
a Christ-centred, Trinitarian body which, in company with the Son worships the Father through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit,
a place where sound, grounded and inculturated preaching, teaching and discipleship can be found,
a welcoming, inclusive* and pastorally sensitive (and able) place where all are 'family',
a body that joins with others congregations in partnership and shared mission (so many appear to want to be 'special' and remain apart from the body that planted it - it is a plant not a split!), and
a body that pays its way and supports itself (with the desire to be able to support others at some stage).
So many people tell me that they don't have enough people to pay and that asking them to cover the costs of what goes on is a deterrent when it comes to growth. Now I support this view and think that we need to accept that planting a church is indeed a costly affair. Those who send also have to fund (and some will argue that providing a paid for minister is enough evidence of that) and this means that there has to be some casting of the sending church's bread upon the water
BUT
the goal and (more importantly) desire has to be that the body becomes self-sustaining and mature. That the new church (that's the people) sees converts come through to maturity and become leaders and in time bring more converts - not to satisfy a desire for numbers but because they want to share the Good News and see people released into the true freedom that being a person of faith (and that faith looking to Christ and the Cross) brings.
We all have to balance our books - we all have to pay for our gas, electric, water, parish share, toilet rolls and other stuff - especially tea )which reminds me that it must be time for a final cuppa before I head out for a wonderfully full day of ministry and madness.
Happy New Year and for all those teachers out there - enjoy the new term and be of good cheer for Easter's coming!
Friday, 4 January 2013
Church Report (1): sets low standard - fails to achieve?
This year as I prepare to engage with churches who are seeking to be more effective (a contentious concept in itself) in terms of being church I have been thinking about how people measure 'good' church and what parameters people use. I'd like to consider the top two of these here today and they are interchangeable in their occupancy of the 'worst' consideration spot. So here goes:
Let's begin with numbers, something that is, and has been, the gold standard for many; and perhaps for always. For as long as I have been in church clergy have struggled to raise their ASA (Average Sunday Attendance) and diocesan staff, when visiting, asked the question, 'And what's your congregation size?' have underpinned the importance of numbers.
Of course, when pressed the response is that, 'Numbers don't matter as much as mission,' but that's only true until we come to the next of the parameters, which if (of course) money!
Money is never important (unless you don't have any that is) but if you can't pay you will soon hear someone utter the harsh words, ' . . then you can't have' somewhere in a conversation. All of this is most understandable because, at the end of the day, bills have to be paid and bank accounts have to be balanced and the need to 'cut one's coat according to one's cloth' is essential.
Now I'm sure I will offend or upset someone, somewhere, over what I am about to say (or perhaps already have by selecting numbers and money as areas of import) but I need to let the things running around my head escape lest the cause my bonce to explode!
Comfortable church
I have been in a number of churches where the congregation size was both comfortable and consistent and this meant that church just pottered on without needing to panic, especially because it was also financially comfortable, or seek to bring people in. This is the first mistake that many church members (including the clergy) seem to make for they assume we only need to grow the church when numbers, or ability to pay, become an issue (and of course the latter is a product of the former). Successful church is one that exists for itself is the message here.
Confused church
Another church model, spurred on perhaps by church growth champions, seeks to add to their number but doesn't have a clue why? They don't mention the Gospel and don't 'push' Jesus but work hard at getting people in and swelling their average congregation sizes. Some of those I met last year were doing stuff in the community but struggled to keep the words 'church, Jesus, Christian' and many other 'off putting' words off the billing. They didn't talk about Jesus, they didn't share their reason gor serving the community (which surely is simple - He came to be 'servant to all' and likewise so do we!).
Another group had been fired up by a visit from an expert who told them that they needed to grow their church. When I asked the ministry team what their core message and means were to be, the looked at me like I was from Mars (the planet, not the confectionary maker). They were merely seeking to grow because that was what 'church was supposed to do'. As I outlined the process of presence ministry, development of relationships, bring people into a place where faith was made real, discipling and all the other stuff, they looked downcast. 'We were just looking to bring people in through events and fairs, not do all that,' moaned one of the team. Oddly, last time I spoke to the minister, they were still waiting to get started!
Skint church
There are many churches who would (or so it appears) be happy to pootle along being church for themselves but they (and oddly, it is always 'suddenly') find themselves faced with an inability to pay their bills and meet their commitments. The result is rarely a series of sermons and teaching on giving but a rallying of the troops to get out there and bring in more people so they in turn can bring in more money. I wish I could say that this is an isolated, far between, experience but this is probably one of the greatest spurs for a church to be 'seeking the lost'. Which brings me nicely on to the next category . .
Scalp church
No, not ministry for those challenged in the follicle department but those who see the role of church being that of 'winning scalps for Jesus'. The positive side is that these folk preach the Gospel and do some fine teaching and often have good musicians too. The down side is that they tend to engage in 'transfer growth' (which is 'sheep stealing ' when the people joining them were once with you) techniques and much like David and the tale of the man who has many sheep but nicks the only sheep another has, these people exist for themselves rather than the wider body.
Now I'm sure some think that this is harsh but I have seen a number of churches where they able and active have been drawn away bu the bright lights, big names and the thrill of the 'bigger church'. This is probably one the most difficult outworking of the 'size really matters' fraternity for as much as one wants to celebrate big churches I find myself wonder what many have left to join and how many churches that would become effective if they were members they pass on the way to the 'Godfest International Gatherings'?
So there we are - a five minute splurge and as the old joke has it, 'I do feel a little better now!'
Let's hope I still do when I read it again later tonight.
Pax
Let's begin with numbers, something that is, and has been, the gold standard for many; and perhaps for always. For as long as I have been in church clergy have struggled to raise their ASA (Average Sunday Attendance) and diocesan staff, when visiting, asked the question, 'And what's your congregation size?' have underpinned the importance of numbers.
Of course, when pressed the response is that, 'Numbers don't matter as much as mission,' but that's only true until we come to the next of the parameters, which if (of course) money!
Money is never important (unless you don't have any that is) but if you can't pay you will soon hear someone utter the harsh words, ' . . then you can't have' somewhere in a conversation. All of this is most understandable because, at the end of the day, bills have to be paid and bank accounts have to be balanced and the need to 'cut one's coat according to one's cloth' is essential.
Now I'm sure I will offend or upset someone, somewhere, over what I am about to say (or perhaps already have by selecting numbers and money as areas of import) but I need to let the things running around my head escape lest the cause my bonce to explode!
Comfortable church
I have been in a number of churches where the congregation size was both comfortable and consistent and this meant that church just pottered on without needing to panic, especially because it was also financially comfortable, or seek to bring people in. This is the first mistake that many church members (including the clergy) seem to make for they assume we only need to grow the church when numbers, or ability to pay, become an issue (and of course the latter is a product of the former). Successful church is one that exists for itself is the message here.
Confused church
Another church model, spurred on perhaps by church growth champions, seeks to add to their number but doesn't have a clue why? They don't mention the Gospel and don't 'push' Jesus but work hard at getting people in and swelling their average congregation sizes. Some of those I met last year were doing stuff in the community but struggled to keep the words 'church, Jesus, Christian' and many other 'off putting' words off the billing. They didn't talk about Jesus, they didn't share their reason gor serving the community (which surely is simple - He came to be 'servant to all' and likewise so do we!).
Another group had been fired up by a visit from an expert who told them that they needed to grow their church. When I asked the ministry team what their core message and means were to be, the looked at me like I was from Mars (the planet, not the confectionary maker). They were merely seeking to grow because that was what 'church was supposed to do'. As I outlined the process of presence ministry, development of relationships, bring people into a place where faith was made real, discipling and all the other stuff, they looked downcast. 'We were just looking to bring people in through events and fairs, not do all that,' moaned one of the team. Oddly, last time I spoke to the minister, they were still waiting to get started!
Skint church
There are many churches who would (or so it appears) be happy to pootle along being church for themselves but they (and oddly, it is always 'suddenly') find themselves faced with an inability to pay their bills and meet their commitments. The result is rarely a series of sermons and teaching on giving but a rallying of the troops to get out there and bring in more people so they in turn can bring in more money. I wish I could say that this is an isolated, far between, experience but this is probably one of the greatest spurs for a church to be 'seeking the lost'. Which brings me nicely on to the next category . .
Scalp church
No, not ministry for those challenged in the follicle department but those who see the role of church being that of 'winning scalps for Jesus'. The positive side is that these folk preach the Gospel and do some fine teaching and often have good musicians too. The down side is that they tend to engage in 'transfer growth' (which is 'sheep stealing ' when the people joining them were once with you) techniques and much like David and the tale of the man who has many sheep but nicks the only sheep another has, these people exist for themselves rather than the wider body.
Now I'm sure some think that this is harsh but I have seen a number of churches where they able and active have been drawn away bu the bright lights, big names and the thrill of the 'bigger church'. This is probably one the most difficult outworking of the 'size really matters' fraternity for as much as one wants to celebrate big churches I find myself wonder what many have left to join and how many churches that would become effective if they were members they pass on the way to the 'Godfest International Gatherings'?
So there we are - a five minute splurge and as the old joke has it, 'I do feel a little better now!'
Let's hope I still do when I read it again later tonight.
Pax
Saturday, 26 November 2011
Church and the things that matter!
It is odd but as I work to become a recovering workaholic (I can stop doing stuff, I'm just a bit too busy to do it at the moment) I find my engagements bring me into contact with so many people who have their own list of what is important. The interesting thing is that the list varies wildly from person to person and every now and then I find a new, and sometimes odd, concern that I have never thought of.
This week, the three major concerns (in no particular order) have been:
Time off - met people who told me that I 'must' take time off for conferences, retreats, courses and the like. Apparently I'm not functioning well unless I do at least two from a list which included Spring Harvest, Soul Survivor, New Wine, Greenbelt, Leadership conferences, Alpha Conferences, retreats, day conferences and the like.
Numbers - The church is pretty obsessed by numbers and the issue of sustainability is high on the agenda of many with whom I engage in my missioner role. The problem is that we are concerned with how many BOPS (Bum On Pews) we have and not without good reason for one minister I spoke with was in a declining church and was desperate to make the 100 on a Sunday benchmark so that they could be a 'larger church', something they felt brought credibility and the potential for longevity.
Sadly, some of those I spoke to were moved towards church growth merely because they couldn't pay the parish share, sad because I thought that Matthew 28 should provide enough impetus on its own. in fact parish share and the spectre of a contracting church were the sword of Dan O'Cleese (sic!) that rendered impotence and energised in equal measure across my conversations.
Healthy Dogcollar or Healthy Church - the most interesting of all has to be this issue. Should the dogcollar be out there meeting people, winning the lost, standing with the broken and disposed and generally doing the stuff or should the dogcollar be more concerned with reading their Bible, building up themselves, going on retreats and generally being concerned with their own spiritual wellbeing at the expense of the church?
A few told me that what was most important was their own walk and that if this meant that the church took second place then so be it. A healthy, committed and Spirit-filled minister who took a day off each way to pray and read their Bible, took time to attend meetings that built them up and restricted evening engagements to but one a week was the primary goal, for it was first and foremost about them and their walk first.
Others told me that they were concerned with the church they were in and that this mean that they were called to support, guide and lead them. Putting themselves second and those they served first was apparently a recipe for a growing and healthy church but a sometimes tired and stretched dogcollar, but, they said, "Isn't this the calling? Aren't we supposed to take up our cross every day?"
Some insight into the things that others see important and some of the conversations this week. Interesting things because the work/life/spiritual balance is important (says he who often gets it wrong) and whilst we have a calling as Christian, there is also the calling as dogcollars and all that that brings to the party. What do you think I wonder?
One dogcollar told me that he knows more stressed than happy clergy and mentioned a few who he knew who had pulled stumps and gone of to 'something else'. A sad situation indeed :(
Pax
This week, the three major concerns (in no particular order) have been:
Time off - met people who told me that I 'must' take time off for conferences, retreats, courses and the like. Apparently I'm not functioning well unless I do at least two from a list which included Spring Harvest, Soul Survivor, New Wine, Greenbelt, Leadership conferences, Alpha Conferences, retreats, day conferences and the like.
Numbers - The church is pretty obsessed by numbers and the issue of sustainability is high on the agenda of many with whom I engage in my missioner role. The problem is that we are concerned with how many BOPS (Bum On Pews) we have and not without good reason for one minister I spoke with was in a declining church and was desperate to make the 100 on a Sunday benchmark so that they could be a 'larger church', something they felt brought credibility and the potential for longevity.
Sadly, some of those I spoke to were moved towards church growth merely because they couldn't pay the parish share, sad because I thought that Matthew 28 should provide enough impetus on its own. in fact parish share and the spectre of a contracting church were the sword of Dan O'Cleese (sic!) that rendered impotence and energised in equal measure across my conversations.
Healthy Dogcollar or Healthy Church - the most interesting of all has to be this issue. Should the dogcollar be out there meeting people, winning the lost, standing with the broken and disposed and generally doing the stuff or should the dogcollar be more concerned with reading their Bible, building up themselves, going on retreats and generally being concerned with their own spiritual wellbeing at the expense of the church?
A few told me that what was most important was their own walk and that if this meant that the church took second place then so be it. A healthy, committed and Spirit-filled minister who took a day off each way to pray and read their Bible, took time to attend meetings that built them up and restricted evening engagements to but one a week was the primary goal, for it was first and foremost about them and their walk first.
Others told me that they were concerned with the church they were in and that this mean that they were called to support, guide and lead them. Putting themselves second and those they served first was apparently a recipe for a growing and healthy church but a sometimes tired and stretched dogcollar, but, they said, "Isn't this the calling? Aren't we supposed to take up our cross every day?"
Some insight into the things that others see important and some of the conversations this week. Interesting things because the work/life/spiritual balance is important (says he who often gets it wrong) and whilst we have a calling as Christian, there is also the calling as dogcollars and all that that brings to the party. What do you think I wonder?
One dogcollar told me that he knows more stressed than happy clergy and mentioned a few who he knew who had pulled stumps and gone of to 'something else'. A sad situation indeed :(
Pax
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)