The First 3 to 5 Minutes

"Visitors will decide in the first 3 to 5 minutes of visiting your church whether they will return."

1. Where did we pick up that bit of marketing savvy? Is it true? I've heard it several places and each time it's left me feeling doubtful. It definitely stresses the need to be warm and welcoming to new folks, and to have the place cleaned up with easy access to things (like parking, the nursery and restrooms). But has the church succumbed so completely to consumer marketing that we are entirely dependent on first impressions?

2. Many times my "first impression" of a person and place has been completely wrong. What I thought I would not like I ended up enjoying or realizing I needed. What happens if the congregation is well trained and excels at first impressions, but isn't authentic and transparent in sharing the love of God in its relationships?

3. How does the church help people transition from being "consumers shopping for a church" to being "seekers of Christ?" Is it by being warm and friendly in the first 3 to 5 minutes and feeling like the job is done?

4. What if we removed the 'open doors' tagline and required that new people be sponsored? Aside from the charge of exclusiveness, what would happen to church growth? I am a Rotarian. We don't have people just walk into our meetings; they are invited by a Rotarian. We take them to the Rotary meeting, introduce them to others, and bring them back several times before asking them to become part of our club. Rotarians balance first impressions with personal relationships.

5. Something tells me that if we truly care about other people connecting with love of Christ that is expressed in the body of Christ, the first 3 to 5 minutes will take care of themselves.

Grandma Evangelism

Sometimes you think of the right thing to say, when the moment is over. Yesterday, on my way home from teaching about Need Oriented Evangelism I thought of the illustration that would have helped. It's one I've used in sermons and other classes.

I was trying to show the point that small churches don't have to think only in terms of "programs" to address people needs in their community. It works just fine when one person takes some initiative, or when "two or three gather in Christ's name" to be the church for someone else.

The church I served last, in the upstate, was a relocation and restart. A small congregation of about 50 moved from a declining mill village location to a new site a couple of miles away, but right in the middle of several growing sub-divisions. It was also right in the middle of several large established churches. The mostly elderly congregation had little to offer in terms of programs and classes, especially when residents could easily "shop" for what they wanted in the nearby churches.

What it did have was several Grandmas' with a desire to show God's love. When new residents would visit the church, the Grandmas would swoop in and connect with the children. They staffed the nursery, and told the parents, "You go worship while we take care of the kids." Many of the new residents were relocated to the area by their jobs, meaning the family grandparents were in other states. The substitute Grandmothers connected with the children, sometimes seeing them during the week - some even attending little league games.

With such connections in place, families began to join. It was only a trickle of one or two families at first. But those families soon brought new friends along with them. Within a couple of years there was a a solid base of members upon which to build. Now the church has about 500 in worship each week, so the evangelism of the Grandmas' keeps bearing fruit.

Needs Oriented Evangelism simply means that the discovered needs of "the stranger in our midst," "the least among us," and the one facing life without Christ trump the perceived needs of the church. Thus whatever church looses its life for Christ's sake, will gain it.

Baptism Reaffirmation and Need-Oriented Evangelism

This Sunday the lectionary takes us to Matthew's account of the baptism of Jesus. We started a few years ago having in the service the Congregation Reaffirmation of the Baptismal Covenant on this Sunday. At the close of the service, people are invited to come to the font, and place their hands in the water to reaffirm their baptism. They can also take one of the smooth stones from the font, to carry with them as a reminder of the gift of God's covenant.

Last year I had two or three people come to me after the service saying how meaningful it was. A couple of them asked why we haven't done this before, and I'm pretty sure they had been at previous reaffirmations. My point is, it's all in God's timing. Previously they weren't at a point in their journey where baptismal reaffirmation meant something to them. But that year, the message of God's love, the symbolism of cleansing and rebirth, or the significance of forgiveness and a covenantal life touched their point of need and yearning.

We all need to remember this, so we don't grow weary in well doing. The best apple pie ever cooked means little to someone with no appetite. The best gift of all, a relationship with Christ, will go untouched by those so full of this life that there's no room for anything else.

Tomorrow after the worship services I'll drive to Clover to lead a workshop on Need-Oriented Evangelism (N-OE). People have needs. How do we identify and connect with their needs as a portal for a) demonstrating God's love through our service, b) establishing a relationship, and c), introducing them to a life of discipleship in Christ? (There's my workshop in a nutshell!)

The bias of N-OE, which basically comes out of Natural Church Development, is programmatic. The quick fix is to do some sort of survey of the community to discover the dominant common need (child care? after-school programs? divorce recovery? etc.?) and then to create a program administered by the church which will lure the targeted population in.

The idea is that those who respond to the program will thus appreciate what the church does, and join. (I've noticed there is little attention given to what to do if the public responds. How will they be introduced to the life of the community of faith, and how will they learn what it means to give one's-self over to a life in relationship with Christ?)

This is a large church orientation which can be frustrating to churches with an average church worship attendance of about 200 or less. Churches of that size can muster the resources to do the necessary program, but it takes a significant commitment of the energy in the congregation to make it happen. Success is not guaranteed. Thus if it doesn't work, doesn't bring in new people, a failure mentality sets in and provides a basis for that self-defeating comment, "We've tried that before."

For a large church, the commitment to a new program calls for a much smaller percentage of their resources (people and money). So if it doesn't work out, they can more easily chalk it up to experience and move on to the next promising opportunity.

How does all this tie in with baptismal reaffirmation, you may ask? We really don't need programs to do N-OE if we are faithful to living out our baptismal covenant. Baptism commissions us to serve in Christ's name. On that basis, church members can develop a sensitivity to the needs of others and then a) respond to them by demonstrating the love of God through service, b) establish a relationship with them, and c) introduce them to a life of discipleship in Christ, with or without the church having an official program for it. Amazing, isn't it?

I sometimes wonder if the purpose of church programs is to keep us busy and give us the feeling we're doing something while we avoid personal engagement in the life of discipleship. So, to not grow weary in well-doing, I will pray that this Sunday will be God's time for another someone in the fellowship to discover their baptismal calling, and to say, this is meaningful and I want to help make a difference, and maybe there's a need God's calling me to pay attention to, and....well, guess that's why we call Him the Living Water.

Left Behind Ministry Concerns

If you read this blog you've noticed I've give attention to the issue of church growth and the emphasis on revitalization. Lately I especially have focused on small churches being compared to large ones. And you may wonder why - since I serve what many might consider to be a large church. I don't think of it with that adjective, but I have attended the Gen. Bd. of Discipleship's Large Church Initiative events, so I guess it applies.

One of the inside facts about the United Methodist Church is that if you get put on a committee, you've probably also become a member of some other committee. That's a little surprise for laity when we ask them to do something like chair the Nurture Committee (and then they find out later they are members of the Church Council.) Well, if you are asked to serve on the Conference Board of Ministry, you find out you also serve on the District Committee on Ministry (dCOM). It's not so bad. The down side is the additional meetings. The good side is keeping up with, and helping people in the journey into ministry.

Each year the dCOM has to re-certify the Local Pastors for their ministry. We meet with them, review their mentor report and continuing education, and hear from them what's been happening in their lives and their churches. I enjoy hearing about the various ministries going on in these churches, most of them smaller membership churches on charges. What I've noticed however is that nearly every local pastor in some way apologizes that their church is small and doesn't, or can't "do that much." Or I hear them talking about trying to mimic ministries that really are designed for larger, program based churches.

The images of success, and pressures of numerical growth shape these pastors, and it seems the effect is to lower the church's and pastor's self-esteem. I want to find a way to move beyond that. I think we need to lift up more models and measures of ministry than the one denominational bean-counters exalt, the number of professions of faith in a year (or if you're Baptist, the number of baptisms - same difference I guess).

If we really believe that Christ is present whenever two or three meet in his name, and if we believe the presence of the risen Christ means life, then what are we saying when we send notice that two or three has to become twenty or thirty, and then two hundred to three hundred, etc. for the gathering to measure up and reveal a church with vitality?

Believe me, I know that churches can become both stagnant and wayward. I know that some behave like dysfunction families. And I know churches can become stuck in the past. And small membership churches especially can become defeatest in attitude. But why add to those challenges by forcing the smaller church through the large church mold?

I don't expect an easy answer or a simple alternative model for assessing the smaller membership church. I'd just like to keep the issue on the table and to suggest that maybe what we need are more questions.

How is the love of Christ experienced in the congregation?
How is the compassion of Christ expressed beyond the congregation?
How is the joy of Christ seen in the church?
How is the good news of Christ shared?
How is the church's record of paying its apportionments?

OK, that last one was tongue in cheek, but it wouldn't be that bad a question, since for Methodists our connectional ministry is expressed in the apportioned budget to fund those ministries. I'd be interested to know what other questions might get at the heart of what it means to be a vital church, and that's for churches of any and every size.

First Syngogue, Bethany

Biblical Bethany is just over the hill from the Temple Mount, on the other side of the Mount of Olives. What a place to serve. Great to be that close to the temple, but how can your synagogue deal with that? Design the greatest Passover observance you want, and everyone will still go to the Temple for the sacrifices. Forget synagogue growth. Who wants to connect with your little place when the best rabbinical scholars in the land are so easily accessible elsewhere?

If you can appreciate that situation, then you might be in a "Left-Behind Church." I picked up that term from a book by Ruth Tucker that I'm reading: "Left Behind in a Megachurch World." Tucker is a professor of missiology at Calvin Theological Seminary. In this book she does a pretty good critique of the "success" idolatry of our culture that has captured the church. And she reviews the malaise that sets into ordinary churches because of the comparison with the "got everything" churches. Just chew on these quotes:

If a church is not growing in numbers (according to the 'experts'), it must be revitalized...numerical growth is the goal, though it is often disguised in less stark terms such as church health, spiritual vitality, or dynamic ministry. In these (revitalization) books there is rarely any mention of the possibility of God working amid declining numbers.

Wal-Mart churches, like the stores, are not first and foremost concerned with people. They are concerned with numbers.

Ministers today face far greater expectations and pressures than did their counterparts in previous generations. Today ministers are compared to the superstars in their ranks.

The emphasis on church growth and success that pastors face in the ministry derives little authority from the Scriptures.

Well, I won't give you all of it, but I will say that she provides good background material to justify the statements I recorded above. But maybe those remarks will keep you thinking, do I evaluate my church by comparing it with other churches? Do I overlook God at work in "left-behind" places because I want to join the American dream of being in the success spotlight?

Do the turn-around programs and new church plants really help the Church discover/maintain a joyful passion for God, demonstrated in service to a hurting world? And if they don't, what will?

No Church Left Behind

I probably shouldn't post this, but hey, why not. I had a friend send me the following joke about a dentist (don't worry, it's clean). As I read it I couldn't help but think that the same applies to churches. Just change some of the wording - instead of number of cavities insert numbers of new members, instead of a state dentist with an excellent rating insert church consultant or pastor of a large growing church - eerie parallel....

My dentist is great! He sends me reminders so I don't forget checkups. He uses the latest techniques based on research. He never hurts me, and I have all my teeth. When I ran into him the other day, I was eager to see if he'd heard about the new state program. I knew he'd think it was great.

"Did you hear about the new state program to measure effectiveness of dentists with their young patients?" I said.
"No," he said. He didn't seem too thrilled. "How will they do that?"
"It's quite simple," I said. "They will just count the number of cavities each patient has at age 10, 14, and 18 and average that to determine a dentist's rating. Dentists will be rated as excellent, good, average, below average, and unsatisfactory. That way parents will know which are the best dentists. The plan will also encourage the less effective dentists to get better," I said. "Poor dentists who don't improve could lose their licenses to practice."
"That's terrible," he said.
"What? That's not a good attitude," I said. "Don't you think we should try.
"Sure I do," he said, "but that's not a fair way to determine who is practicing good dentistry."
"Why not?" I said. "It makes perfect sense to me."
"Well, it's so obvious," he said. "Don't you see that dentists don't all work with the same clientele, and that much depends on things we can't control? For example, I work in a rural area with a high percentage of patients from deprived homes, while some of my colleagues work in upper middle-class neighborhoods. Many of the parents I work with don't bring their children to see me until there is some kind of problem, and I don't get to do much preventive work.

Also, many of the parents I serve let their kids eat way too much candy from an early age, unlike more educated parents who understand the relationship between sugar and decay. To top it all off, so many of my clients have well water which is untreated and has no fluoride in it. Do you have any idea how much difference early use of fluoride can make?"

"It sounds like you're making excuses," I said. "I can't believe that you, my dentist, would be so defensive. After all, you do a great job, and you needn't fear a little accountability."
"I am not being defensive!" he said. "My best patients are as good as anyone's, my work is as good as anyone's, but my average cavity count is going to be higher than a lot of other dentists because I chose to work where I am needed most."
"Don't' get touchy," I said.

"Touchy?" he said. His face had turned red, and from the way he was clenching and unclenching his jaws, I was afraid he was going to damage his teeth. "Try furious! In a system like this, I will end up being rated average, below average, or worse. The few educated patients I have who see these ratings may believe this so-called rating is an actual measure of my ability and proficiency as a dentist. They may leave me, and I'll be left with only the most needy patients. And my cavity average score will get even worse. On top of that, how will I attract good dental hygienists and other excellent dentists to my practice if it is labeled below average?"

The program sounded reasonable to me, so I asked, "How else would you measure good dentistry?"
"Come watch me work," he said. "Observe my processes."
"That's too complicated, expensive and time-consuming," I said. "Cavities are the bottom line, and you can't argue with the bottom line. It's an absolute measure."
"That's what I'm afraid my parents and prospective patients will think. This can't be happening," he said despairingly.
"Now, now," I said, "don't despair. The state will help you some."
"How?" he asked.
"If you receive a poor rating, they'll send a dentist who is rated excellent to help straighten you out," I said brightly.
"You mean," he said, "they'll send a dentist with a wealthy clientele to show me how to work on severe juvenile dental problems with which I have probably had much more experience? BIG HELP!"

"There you go again," I said. "You aren't acting professionally at all."
"You don't get it," he said. "Doing this would be like grading schools and teachers on an average score made on a test of children's progress with no regard to influences outside the school, the home, the community served and stuff like that. Why would they do something so unfair to dentists? No one would ever think of doing that to schools."
Just maybe this will help you understand why educators resent the recent federal NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT.

Will you now serve Christ in this place...

We have some folks planning to join our church this Sunday, so I've spent a lot of my visiting time this week checking in with them, to see if there are any questions, or in some cases, to learn more about the family or person. Receiving new members is always an encouraging time for a congregation. If someone wants to join with you in a purpose, it obviously includes an affirmation to you of who you are and what you are about. We tend to like the folks who make choices similar to our own, don't we?

I probably shouldn't confess this, but I am amazed that anyone actually "joins" the church anymore. We have an open door policy where you can come and fully participate in the life and worship of the church without ever joining. At Trinity you can be on a committee or task group without being a church member. The only thing forbidden is leadership as a chairperson of a ministry area, or serving on an administrative committee.

With everyone so consumer-minded today, I'm surprised a lot more people don't say, "Why join, I don't get any more benefits for joining than I do for not joining?" Add to this the factors of a) individualism over community, b) suspicion of institutions, c) minimal loyalty to groups and "brands," and d) simply the frantic, often chaotic pace of life! Still, through the gauntlet come those desiring to say, "Yes, I will serve Christ in this local church with my prayers, my presence, my gifts, and my service."

Maybe the act of people joining isn't an affirmation of the congregation after all - but an affirmation of the deep longing placed in each of us to be a part of God's family. Those who join may not even think of it in these terms, but perhaps they are responding to the divine call to live out what they believe, to "come, follow Jesus," to make their faith real in daily life with, through, and sometimes in spite of, the local congregation. May their commitments open us all to hear that call anew.

Growth by Numbers 2

After that long post on growth I thought of an illustration I've used teaching. I served a suburban church that grew steadily. However, in its early years as a re-located congregation, growth was difficult. The mostly elderly congregation in a first building had very little to offer in terms of programs, etc. Added to that was the fact that the church was surrounded by well-established large churches of various denominations.

Then some new families with children visited, and they returned. They got involved and began to bring other new families from their sub-divisions. From that growth programs developed and more growth occurred. But what connected these first families to the church? The surrogate grandmothers.

One mom said, "My husband's company moved us several states from our families. We tried the new little church and immediately a sweet woman took our boys. She took interest in them, brought them home-made cookies, and had them over to her house. She became their South Carolina grandma."

With nothing really to offer in terms of promotions or programs, the church grew because the grandma's gave what they had, their love - in this case expressed as genuine care and interest in others. Guess you could say, they grew the old-fashioned way....

Growing by the Numbers

I wonder if people still paint by the numbers. You've seen those kits you buy with a picture outlined and the sections numbered to correspond to little containers of paint. They are for sale because we like difficult things made simple for us.

So, I'm going to make it simple to understand growth in a church, class, youth group, etc. It's as simple as 1, 2, or 3. It's growth by promotions, programs, or people. (See I even got them to all start with the same letter!)

1. Promotions. You can attract people with a big event, or something out of the ordinary. Churches have unique rallies (like a biker rally) or a special speaker (like a Christian athelete or celebrity). Youth groups are always looking to create events that are off the edge, something that will get the kids talking and will bring other youth to check it out.

Promotionalism infiltrates standard church events. Vacation Bible Schools, once a summer enrichment for the church's children, are now promoted as attraction events, with grand themes and characters, videos and logos. Worship (called "seeker services") is now designed for this in some churches. And preachers have adopted it. I just heard of a mega-church pastor in the upstate who preached a sermon on repentance while lying in a casket. I'm sure that got people talking about it to their friends. And it has the preacher working to come up with a fresh act.

One of the difficulites of promotion growth is that you have to keep doing something new and different to get noticed. Once churches were unique for having coffee during worship, but no more. Used to be you could stand out if you had a wild-game supper event. Now even the wild is common.

2. Programs. This is the most common method of growth in the church today. Create a quality program that meets the needs of people. This could be a Bible study program, a life situation program (such as parenting, divorce recovery or marriage enrichment), a 12-step program, children's ministry, music, missions, or whatever.

This method is reinforced by denominational supply stores and para-church organizations that package programs and sell products. In fact we now have the term "needs-oriented evangelism," which basically instructs churches to determine the needs of people in their community and offer programs that address those needs.

This approach fits in nicely with the consumer orientation of our culture. People can, and do, shop around the churches for the programs that best suit their needs. Program growth works, but to what are the people connected - the program? the church? or Christ?

3. People. Surprise, surprise, growth also occurs person to person. When a friend or someone you respect introduces you to someone who is influential in their life, you usually take note. This method takes longer: longer for the individual to become a disciple and longer for the numbers to begin to add up. Smith Barney Brokerage Firm once had an ad where they said, "We make money the old fashioned way, we earn it." This is the old-fashioned way the church has grown (seems to me even Jesus used it).

There doesn't seem to be a lot of emphasis on the people to people method. We'd rather the promotions and programs do the work without having to get involved personally. Person to person growth demands more of the Christian, you have to be real in your own faith and you have to extend yourself to others. The people (or relationship) method was illumined by missionary/evangelist D.T.Niles years ago when he said, "Evangelism is one beggar telling another where to find bread."

4. There really isn't a fourth, just checking to see if you were paying attention. But I do have a closing comment, or two. I'm not denouncing promotions or programs. I make use of them as well. I just think we depend on them too much as the answer for our calling to share the good news of forgiveness and redemption in Christ. And smaller churches that have trouble creating or sustaining programs, begin to think they can't grow. They can't compete with larger churches in promotions and programs. Then their self esteem suffers because they are told they have nothing to offer.

Finally, maybe this is stretching it, but my simplistic three have a parallel in the world of sales. Stores attract and sell by 1) door-buster events, 2) quality products, and 3) a reputation built up by word-of-mouth. I would like to know, for the church, which method has the most lasting effect.