SHOULDER TO SHOULDER #139 ---- 9/11/00
Posted by: lifeunlimited <lifeunlimited@...>
As We fight The Good Fight
(A letter of Encouragement to People in
Vocational and Lay Ministry)
SHOULDER TO SHOULDER #139 ---- 9/11/00
TITLE: "Common Factors of Effective Ministry"
Dear Partner in Ministry:
Today is another one of those days when I feel torn between the reports
of victory and success and the realization of so much self centered
lethargy and lack of commitment in churches today. I have been deeply
burdened over reports received recently of churches fighting or
splitting, of pastors being fired, and churches living in perpetual
limbo, doing so little though they have so much.
And, then, today I ran across a fascinating report (from a particular
seminary) that reminded me there are indeed some churches who take their
mission seriously and are working hard at getting the job done. They are
the kind of church I'd like to be a part of. Tragically, I know of none
within easy driving distance of where I live; though there are literally
hundreds of churches between here and there, the nearest "alive" one
would be at least 60 miles away.
I want to use this contrast to make the point that if a church does
certain things, it will be effective. If it fails to do so, it will not.
A CHURCH IN TOTAL DISARRAY:
There is a particular church I have known of for more than 40 years. In
fact, I know personally four of its previous pastors. I have ministered
there on numerous occasions over the past twenty years.
It is in a perfect location on the main business route through town and
across the street from a small university. It has more than enough
property in the two city blocks it owns. Its multiple buildings are in
excellent condition and more than adequate.
The size of the church is, in my opinion, just about ideal ---- small
enough to be personal and yet big enough to have adequate resources for
ministry. It has a good cross section of older and younger members and
also a good economic representation although probably a little short
handed on wealthier people.
And yet ---- it is dead spiritually, visionless, and deadlocked in its
polity and practice with fear, suspicion, and disunity silently flowing
through its very being.
And nobody seems to know ---- though a few do care.
Every time I think of this congregation I get frustrated, and a heaviness
of grief sweeps over me. It is such a tragic, pathetic, ---- and totally
unnecessary situation.
This is a church where no team leader steps to the front to rally them in
the late innings of the game. At the same time there are several who
want to control things. They want control, but not leadership.
It is also a church that is indecisive, and it has been for years. It
has depended so totally on the vision of a pastor that it has none of its
own. Because the church left major decisions up to the pastor in the
past, there is now a backlash in which it tries to control everything by
rules, regulations, and restrictive polity.
The church treats the pastor like a hired gun who does the bulk of the
work. True, there are some who want to change that, and there have been
unsuccessful attempts to do so in the past. Whenever I see the church
and its pastoral team, I'm reminded of the great statement I heard thirty
years ago ---- "the average church is like a football game where there
are 22 men on the field desperately in need of rest being watched by
22,000 spectators in the stands desperately in need of exercise.
The church does not have a healthy concept of what The Church really is.
Many of the people see it as being an immobile spot along the street to
which the hurting and unbelieving should flock of their own initiative
rather than it being a mobile, aggressive, outreaching group of people
more concerned about lives than numbers. Too many see it as a museum in
which to display its past rather than as a hospital from which to
demonstrate its compassion.
Neither does the church have a vision. It keeps waiting on the pastor
for one, not realizing he is beat up enough that what vision he has
cannot be clearly articulated, and if he did communicate it adequately,
the church would never buy into it or claim it as its own.
There seems to be little or no coordination between the various
organizational entities within the church, whether department heads or
committees. The left hand really doesn't know what the right hand is
doing ---- and if it ever finds out, it will probably fight.
There seems to be no clear cut corporate agenda ---- just several little
personal ones that, if carried out, will not serve the common good of the
congregation.
And, the church is continually trying to produce new wine (its first
mistake since that's not how new wine comes) and then pour it into old,
antiquated, cracked, leaking wine skins. On one hand it's afraid of what
the new wine may do, and on the other it is determined to retain the old
skins still containing the faint aroma of the old wine. To a great
extent, that mind set reminds me of the athlete from a particular country
who won a gold medal in the Olympics and came home and had it bronzed.
To make it even more heartbreaking, the real tragedy of this particular
church is not so much the condition it is in, but that there seems to be
no indication that anything will ever change.
The thought of pastoring a church in that condition, as loving and caring
as many of the members may be, simply exhausts me.
Worse yet, ---- it breaks my heart!
It doesn't have to be that way . . . .
But it will be until there is a real movement of brokenness,
helplessness, hopelessness, and repentance on the part of the people,
especially those who hold positions of responsibility. I want to call
them leaders, but I cannot ---- because they are not. A leader is a
person who 1) knows who he is, 2) knows where he is going, 3) knows how
to get there, and 4) knows how to get others to go with him. None of
those characteristics are significantly present as far as I can tell from
a distance.
This raises the question, then, of just what is the difference in this
church and many of those about which I read in this particular report?
Though certainly not exhaustive, consider the following:
PRACTICAL INGREDIENTS:
The particular journal to which I referred earlier began a series of
features on a number of churches with this statement: "Of the 100
largest churches in the (denomination), over 50 are pastored by [our]
alumni. Then using nearly one third of the journal's total pages, it
identified certain characteristics of those churches.
Reading the lines, and between them as well, here is what I found.
1. CHURCH'S AGE: Age of the church was no factor. Not only were some
begun in the 1980's and 1990's, but others were founded as early as 1868,
1848, and even as far back as 1805! In fact, of those 50 churches, 20 of
them were begun prior to 1900, and 30 prior to World War II. So, forget
using "old" church vs "new" church as an excuse to forsake a church's
calling.
2. TENURE OF PASTORATES; Under their current growth, the churches had
long pastorates, averaging pastorates of 14 years. Ranging from one year
to 35 years, I discovered that there was a definite correlation between
pastoral tenure and number of reported salvations. That may tell us
there is a connection between longer pastorates and intensified
evangelism.
I also found only 25 churches were pastored by men who had been there
less than ten years, and only 12 by men who had been there five or less.
Of those whose current pastors had been there less than 10 years, the
vast majority of them had been pastored previously by men who stayed ten
years or more. One church had two pastorates of 43 and 52 years
respectively before the two most recent short pastorates.
3. WORSHIP STYLES: Of these 50 churches, all but ten had either
"blended" or "varied" worship services. Five used exclusively
contemporary and five exclusively traditional. The other 40 provided
either a blend of contemporary, traditional, and praise/worship styles or
provided a choice, using contemporary in one service and traditional in
another. Thirty chose to blend the styles together.
It was also interesting to see that the churches that used blended and/or
varied worship styles reported 15,784 recorded professions of faith in
Christ, averaging 395 per church ---- regardless of size, age, or
location. If you took out the five that reported 100 or less, the
average would be 461 reported salvations.
Likewise, those five churches who use strictly contemporary worship
styles reported 3,674 salvations, averaging 735 salvations per year per
church. Remove the one church that reported only 70 salvations and the
average jumps to 901 per church.
The five churches using strictly traditional worship styles reported
1,751 professions of faith in Christ, averaging 350 per year per church.
However, if you remove the one that reported 1,198 itself, that leaves
the other four reporting an average of 138 recorded salvations for a
total of 553.
Finally, if you look at all the churches that use either total
contemporary or a mixture of some sort of both contemporary and
traditional music and worship styles, you find there is a total of 19,458
reported salvations at an average of 432 per church for the year.
So, regardless of what you and I may personally feel about worship style,
there is little doubt that there is a correlation between the comfort and
acceptance level of unbelievers in relationship to the style of worship
and type of music used.
4. SUNDAY SCHOOL: Another interesting fact is that all but three of the
churches reported active use of the Sunday school or some form of
structured Bible study. Those who did not, had some of the lowest
reported salvations.
5. STRONG PULPIT MINISTRY: Almost without exception these churches had
pastors who were strong in the pulpit, providing solid expositional and
yet practical messages. Yet very few of them would be considered as "big
personality" type of preachers. Many of them, while confident in the
pulpit, still demonstrate humility, servanthood, and genuine caring for
their people.
There were other characteristics I could mention, but let me move on to
what I believe to be the most important characteristics pertaining to . .
. .
SPIRITUAL INGREDIENTS:
1. BROKENNESS: Many of these churches or pastors had at one time gone
through the process of their worlds falling apart around them, bringing
them to the end of pride and self confidence, and a total yieldedness to
the refining and purifying fire of the Holy Spirit. There was often the
evidence of the "grain of wheat" falling into the ground and dying. It
has been my contention for thirty years that before you can have
resurrection life and power, you must first go through the crucifixion
and burial.
2. LORDSHIP: Both pastors and churches corporately would acknowledge
the absolute and uncontested Lordship of Jesus Christ as Head of and
Master over His Church. There was full recognition that the particular
church did not belong to the people, or even to their denomination, but
only the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, it was He and He alone who had
the right to give direction and to receive the praise and glory.
3. FOUNDATIONAL PRAYER BASE: Frankly, I don't know of any church that
is growing significantly that does not have some type of corporate prayer
ministry. If there was anything needed in the life of the average pastor
and in the program of the average church, it is the life of prayer.
There has to be a reason why Jesus said His house was to be called a
House of Prayer.
4. SENSE OF SELF IDENTITY: The pastors of many of these churches are
men who have a very clear sense who they are as God has made them, and
who they have become in Christ. At the same time the churches often have
an awareness that they are not just ordinary churches but have been
uniquely assembled to have a special identity, ministry, and purpose.
They would never see themselves as "cookie cutter" churches all alike.
5. VISION: Almost without exception the pastors and other leaders in
these churches have a clear vision of what God wants for them and from
them. As I mentioned several months ago in my series on vision, they had
come to "see what God sees", and they answered His call. Having been
given direction by the vision, they then became driven by purpose,
motivated by opportunity, and filled with praise over the end results.
Yesterday in the church where I am interim pastor, I shared the following
home spun saying with the Church Council as they prepare to develop a
mission statement and a vision: "A man who shoots at nothing hits it
every time."
A church with no vision will do the same thing. Perhaps one of the real
strong points of these 50 or more churches is the recognition they have
of a vision God has given them.
IN CONCLUSION:
Irregardless of this publication's insinuation that the reason those
fifty or more churches were some of the largest was perhaps because they
were pastored by this seminary's alumni, I'm sure you would contend with
me that the above practical and spiritual factors were the real reason
for their growth and success.
Besides ---- why in the world would any institution genuinely seeking
after the heart of God choose to boast of any such thing in the first
place? It seems to me that God is the One who deserves both credit and
glory.
More importantly though, my friend, is what does this have to do with
your ministry and mine?
Frankly the church size is not the issue. But the spiritual elements and
the practical characteristics may well be the issue.
No matter how old your church is, how big or small, where it is situated,
or what your tenure or education level may be, it is my conviction that
God wants to bless and prosper your church.
Maybe a good exercise to help us move on to the next phase of God's
activity in our lives and ministries would be to ask the Holy Spirit to
show us anything we need to learn from the history and ministry of these
great churches.
He just may want to make the church where you serve a great one. Maybe
not big, but certainly great ---- a people known for their faith, their
vision, their prayer, their servant spirit, their world view of the
Gospel.
It can happen to any church.
It can happen to yours.
FINALLY:
Have a wonderful week, my friend. Writing to you is such a joy. Thanks
for letting me do that.
Pray for Jo Ann and me this week as God brings us to your mind. We're
still trying to get my Father's house redecorated and ready to sell, and
go through many of Mother's things to disburse. In addition we must
prepare this week for the annual Missions Week next week at the
university where we recruit teams for our missions trip. We must recruit
a team to go to Kiev, Ukraine in January and another to return to
Sarajevo, Bosnia next May.
There is much to be done. We need your prayers.
In His Bond of Grace, Mercy, and Sufficiency,
Bob Tolliver ---- (Rom 1:11-12)
Copyright September, 2000. All rights reserved.
We would love to hear from you ---- prayer requests, insights, etc. Feel
free to drop us a note at <[email protected]>.
If this letter has blessed you and you know of someone else who needs to
be encouraged, feel free to forward it in its entirety to all such people
you know.
If you would like a list of past issues which you could receive upon
request, just let us know. Write <[email protected]>. We can send
you a digest containing a brief statement about each previous letter.
__
/ |
(_/____)
/ ^ ^
{ (O) (O) }
------oOOO---------U--------OOOo------
Hang in there! I'm with you!
--------ooooO--------------- Ooooo--------
( ) /
| | /
(_) (_)
TO SUBSCRIBE, send any message to <[email protected]>.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE, send any message to
<[email protected]>.