jdgreear.com

Revitalization vs. Planting... Thoughts #8 and #9: Trouble-Makers and Why NOT to do 2 services

If you missed it... our friends at 9 Marks ran a special issue of their webzine on whether the multi-campus church (like we are at the Summit) is biblical or not. They asked 2 of us write "for" it, and about 121 people to write against it. :) Basically, I was asked to rub raw meat on myself and drop myself into a dog kennel. But Mark Dever and the others were pretty gracious. I am very grateful for those guys at 9 Marks, and have learned a great deal from them. You can check it out here.

This is the last in my stream of consciousness thoughts on what goes into a church revitalization, and whether you should try it or just leave the church and go plant. Here are all the others.

8. Confront troublemakers quickly.

Have you ever noticed how people can be such complete jerks online...saying things they would never have the courage to say to your face? The bad news is that many of us are actually even bigger jerks than what we act... we're just scared of what people would think about us so we're nice to people. I think inwardly we know we're wrong, so when we have to look someone in the face we change our attitude.

I've noticed that a lot of people will really trashtalk me, our leadership, and our ideas... that is, to others, but the moment I confront them they cave like a house of cards. So, I think when we hear about people who are creating movements against what God is doing in the church, we should confront them quickly. If they represent "a group of people," then get those people together. I never settle for "well, a bunch of people have been saying this..." I ask them for names and start dialing numbers while they are in the office.

I'm not saying that this will suddenly cause everyone to agree with you, but I think it makes people think twice about whether or not they really believe what they're saying enough to stand on it. It's easier to shoot someone in the back than shoot them while looking into their face. I want people who oppose what is happening to be public about it, not to have the silent anonymity of malicious backbiter.

Plus, when you confront someone, there is a much greater chance for reconciliation. "Dehumanizing" someone is the quickest way to act violently against them... This is how Hitler convinced Germans to commit such atrocities against the Jews... in a small way, it's how many people feel free to trash others verbally... they don't put "flesh and blood" to the thing they are criticizing, so they are cold and brutal.

Confronting others face to face, of course, what Paul and Jesus counsel repeatedly (Matthew 18; Galatians 2, 6, etc.) and what is demonstrated in the leadership of guys like Moses. I know confrontation is hard. But listen, pastor, it's time for the boy in you to sit down and the man to stand up :)

9. DON'T do 2 services.

For whatever it's worth, I don't think it's a good idea to do 2 services as a way of "introducing" change to your congregation... i.e., do one traditional and one contemporary. I suppose there are some situations where this may be best, but, for the most part, it seems to create 2 churches which always have the aspiration to one day unify... but never actually do. And if the contemporary service "works," you have a traditional congregation a little jealous, even resentful, of the new service that's getting all the attention. Plus, they just don't feel unified with them, and have lost out on the opportunity of living missionally.

We had people at our church asking, when we started, if we'd do another more traditional service... and, frankly, our leadership just said no. We wanted to move and grow as a church, and we explained that that meant that everyone, including me, would have to put up with some stuff they didn't like. Yes, some people left the church... but in retrospect I feel like we made the right decision. We grew as a unified body, and established an ethos of "we do whatever it takes to reach people, even when it's not according to our personal preferences" in our church that, I believe, has carried us a long way.

OK... that's it. I don't know if any of these were helpful for any of you guys out there leading churches... but that's all I got :). I have prayed that those of you reading this blog that are in a situation trying to figure out if you should revitalize or leave your church and go plant would have the wisdom, courage and faith to do whatever God is calling you to do.

Revitalization vs. Planting… Thoughts 5–7:

So… If you believe God is calling you to revitalize your church, and by that you mean that you can see that God is moving in a particular group of people to transform them into a thriving Gospel community (as opposed to you feeling a burden to redeem a piece or property or a historical institution, See Link Here) and you yourself feel called to be a part of that process (See Part two here), here are 3 key words that summarize how change in a church happens, and they make up thoughts 5, 6 and 7. These three words characterized our first 3 years at the Summit, when all the major changes happened—i.e. renewing our vision; change the name; selling our property; moving to a different part of town; going multi-campus; and changing the church government structure.

Thought #5:

Vision: It cannot be said too strongly or too often. When it comes to change, vision is everything. If you give people the why, they’ll put up with just about any what. Vision creates a sense of shared energy. Vision unites people, and causes them to put up with significant levels of discomfort. The best I’ve ever heard this said was by an old French mystic, Antoine de Saint-Exupery: “If you want to build a ship, don’t command men to gather wood, don’t divide the work and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea.” Vision creates its own, internal, unstoppable movement.

John Kotter, in his great book Leading Through Change (a secular book about changing corporations), says that the thing that almost every leader who is trying to lead change mistakes is how much the people “behind” him understand the vision. There is a severe knowledge gap. You see the need for change; you feel it; you can’t imagine going forward without it. You have been on a journey. You have to take the people you are trying to change on that same journey. Create the sense of urgency within them and they’ll change themselves! As my friend Ed Stetzer says, “People have to feel that the pain of staying the same with will be greater than pain of change.”

Thought #6:

Concentric Circles: This second concept builds on the first. You have to communicate your vision in concentric circles. Your first circle are the most influential people in the church. They may be an “official” group, like an elder, staff or deacon team; or a non-officially recognized group, called the E.F. Hutton group (remember the E.F. Hutton commercials? “When E.F. Hutton talks, everyone listens”…). 

Communicate your vision, passionately and clearly, to that first group. Then move outward to the second group of influential people, then the third, etc etc. I do this for three reasons… One, if I can’t convince the innermost circle of leaders to go along, I’ll never convince the whole congregation! Some guys try to railroad changes through just because they can. This is a tragic mistake, I believe… as even when you get your way, people will “vote with their feet.” Second, taking it through “the circles” allows the leaders to feel like they have buy in. It allows them to help you improve your presentation, and understand the objections. Third, when you stand up in front of your congregation and say, “This idea has the support of the elders, deacons, pastors and staff, and key leaders of our church, what fool is going to oppose you? As you move into outward into each circle, your momentum gets stronger and stronger.

Thought #7:

Timing: By this word, I mean you have to fight the Right Battles at the Right Time: Sun Tzu said that good generals are generals who know when the right time to fight a battle is. Most battles, he said, are not won by strength or by the “rightness” of your cause, but by knowing when to fight them. You fight some battles and win them, but they were extraordinarily costly, and had you waited, you could have won them without a drop of blood! Fighting the right battles at the right time creates momentum, the one, intangible but absolutely necessary component for real, effective change. Thus, the right battle, fought at the wrong time, is the wrong battle.

I believe this is very true when you are engineering change for the church. Some battles don’t need to be fought yet. Practically, you need to fight about ONLY those things that will help the church grow. When you are growing, a lot of the objections to your changes will be muted or disregarded. Success creates its own justification… I did not change the church government the first year, or propose selling the property the first month.  They were both decisions that needed to be made, but we didn’t need to do them to start growing. When I first came to the church, the “only” battle I wanted to win was to have 1000 on Easter, which was 3 months after I got there (we were currently running 350). We forgot about EVERYTHING else but that. Thanks to God’s help and a lot of excitement, we did it… we had 1122 on Easter. That “victory” gave me the momentum to create, “bloodlessly,” a bunch of other changes. People had “tasted the blood” of victory, and they were willing to go through more pain and sacrifice to get another taste of it!

What things must change to grow? The doctrine, of course, has to be right. The vision has to be clear. Beyond that, I will say that I think a lot of guys trying to change have failed because they have not significantly “broken” with the past failures of the church. They may get up and talk a new game, but the people just think it’s a younger, more excited version of the old. Change of worship venue, your dress, church name (or, “nickname” as I’ll explain in a minute), new website, worship leader or style, etc… these are the things that communicate “this is a whole new day.” I’ve seen guys who just could not make things grow until they got the people out of the venue, or redecorated the worship venue significantly. Some guys, who didn’t want to change the church name, added a “nickname”… a friend added to their church’s name “X Baptist Church,” a little nickname, “Church at the X.” The second name became a missional title. First Baptist Franklin became “The People’s Church.” That’s also what we did here at the Summit. For a while, we were both “The Summit” and “Homestead Heights Baptist Church.” The new name gave a new, missional identity. You may have to bust up some things to create the new identity. But as long as the people see you as a continuation of the dead past, you’re not very likely (IMO) to get anywhere.

Revitalization vs. Planting? pt 4

Here's the 4th thought when considering whether to "revitalize" your church or to plant? If you missed the first 3, here is part 1, 2, and 3.

Thought #4: Be willing to fight for the church, but never as a defense of your own reputation

Somehow a subtle wimpification-heresy has infiltrated today's American pastor... as in, when people really start to criticize you, or rebel, or try and take over the church, you should just quietly absorb it, take it on the chin, not fight back, and see what happens. Or, if some power brokers in the church really attack you, it may be best just to not defend yourself and humbly quit since real Christians don't fight.

Total lies.

A good shepherd takes on the wolves that threaten to damage his flock. He fights. It's never in self-defense, of course... but, quite often, what is being most threatened is not the reputation of the pastor but the health of the church... Someone is trying to harm the flock that Jesus purchased with His blood! The local church is Jesus' most expensive investment--so how can we not fight to protect it?

Paul provides a great example for us. Paul's decision on whether or not to fight, as demonstrated in some of his epistles, was based on what was best for the flock, not for him personally. In certain places he does not defend himself because, as he sees it, defending his reputation will provide no immediate benefit to the local church (see Philippians 1:13ff). In others, however, he goes to great ends to defend himself and his work, because to do so helps the local church (see the whole book of 2 Corinthians!).

In other words, we should never fight to protect our reputation, but we should be willing to fight to protect the body. It may superficially appear "humble" and "Christ" to obsequiously walk away and surrender when you are being attacked, but you may be doing the flock a great disservice in doing so. You may be turning over your flock to wolves. No shepherd worthy of Jesus' name should ever do that. You need to say "only over my dead body."

We must, of course, always remain sweet-spirited and forgiving, and never take the wounds personally. God will vindicate and defend us. We should be as gracious with others as we expect God to be with us. And by "fighting," of course, I do not mean fighting in the way the world fights... as in trying to wound others either emotionally or physically. By "fighting" I mean striving to keep the Gospel clear and the mission central.

Furthermore, we should always remember that our battle is not against flesh and blood, but Satan himself.

We ourselves were once prisoners of Satan, so we must be gracious to those who are currently under his snare just as we once were. But we must also, graciously and lovingly, rebuke the works of darkness.

The church is Jesus' most expensive investment. As Jesus demonstrated, she is worth fighting, even dying, to protect.

Revitalization vs. Planting? pt 3

*This is part 3 in a series of thoughts on whether or not you should seek to revitalize a church, or plant a new one instead. Here is Part 1, Part 2 , and Part 4.

NOTE TO SUMMIT... I am so incredibly pumped about Easter! God has given me a clear word for this week and the next about people encountering Jesus in "unexpected" ways! God-willing, we'll shatter a lot of the myths people believe about Jesus and Christianity, and really try and separate the real Jesus from the cultural, religious stereotype we have created of Him! I believe that lots and lots of people are going to come to Christ in the next 2-3 weeks!

Thought #3: Don't underestimate "Staying Power"

In thought #2, "Has God been preparing the church for a revitalization?" I made the point that if you cannot see the signs of God clearly working in the church to revitalize it, I would not advise staying and trying to do it yourself. The way I see it, you only have one life to live, and I would not want to "waste" my life by spending it banging my head against the wall, trying to lead people who don't want to be led... especially when the fields are so white unto harvest... there's too many lost people to waste my time with hard hearted religious people!

That said, I want to make a complementary (hopefully not contradictory) point regarding staying power. I believe the best ministries are built not by people who "explode" onto the scene with immediate success, but by those who "slow burn" in a place, gradually crafting the church to be what God wants it to be.

I've heard a few things from wise, older men regarding this.

One was from Homer Lindsay, Jr of First Baptist Jacksonville. It was that you are not really "the pastor" until about year 10. Up until then, you haven't really established the trust with your leaders, and the DNA you have tried to inculcate hasn't set.

Ligon Duncan, former head of the Presbyterian Church in America denomination, said that "Pastors consistently overestimate what they can accomplish in 5 years; they consistently underestimate what they accomplish in 20 years."

Jim Collins, who wrote Good to Great, makes basically the same point in his chapter on "the flywheel" concept... bringing real change, inculcating DNA works like spinning a flywheel (i.e., a big, heavy metal wheel mounted horizontally on a vertical pole). In your first "spin," you exert an extraordinary amount of effort for very little result. However, your next "effort," building on the slow momentum of the movement, takes less energy but results in faster spin. On and on it goes until the momentum of the wheel is turning itself, requiring only the slightest taps of your fingertips from you. Organizations are like that, Collins says. Few leaders can come in and give it a mighty spin and be done. Most of us push, then a little more, then a little more, and over time the movement we desire is created, with each year momentum building on the momentum of the year before. Like Sun Tzu said in Art of War, creating and capitalizing on momentum is everything.

All three of these statements are making the same point. It is staying in one place, weathering the changes, and being a consistent force of leadership in the exciting and mundane chapters that bring lasting change.

Plus, I think a lot about Jesus' story of the persistent widow and the unjust judge. The parable is quite a ridiculous tale... God is compared to an unjust, uncaring judge who answers a widow's request simply because she is annoying him. If even an unjust judge will respond to persistence, won't the loving, just God of the universe? For whatever reason, God has ordained that some miracles only come through persistent asking. Sometimes we give up when we don't see an immediate miracle, and that in unfortunate, because we might be giving up right before God gives the miracle in our church that we are seeking.

We live in a world where the internet makes for a seemingly infinite number of possibilities to be open before us. Regardless of where we are, somewhere, somebody, has it easier... and we can flit from one opportunity to the next. I love what Mark Dever, pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist in Washington, D.C., says about this in an article he wrote in 2000 on "How to Change Your Church":

We pastors need to set a different model in our churches. We need to teach (our people) that commitment is good, whether that’s to our marriages and families, our friends and our faith, or our church and our neighborhood. It is in the light of such longer-term commitments (thinking in terms not of months, but of decades) that we can help our churches find their right priorities… To that end, choose your battles wisely, carefully prioritizing one needed change over another. Which of the changes that are needed is most needed right now? Which can wait? Generally speaking, pastors need to learn how to think in a mature, long-range way.

Was this thought contradictory to thought #2? You'll have to decide. I intend it to be a "holy tension" we should hold as we process whether God is leading us to try and revitalize our church or plant a new one.

Of course, at the end of the day you measure success not by how big or effective your ministry is, but by whether or not you have obeyed God. He's the only one who can tell you whether to stay or go, and obedience to Him is always success, even in perceived failure. More to come...

Revitalization vs. Planting? pt 2

*This is the second of several posts discussing whether or not you should seek to revitalize a church, or plant a new one instead. Here are parts 1, 3, and 4.

Has God been preparing the church for a revitalization?

The second thought that I'd have for you if you are considering whether to try and revitalize your church or to plant a new one is this: It is essential that you discern whether or not the situation is right for a revitalization. If God has not orchestrated the revitalization, and you don't see signs of God's movement all around, and yourself as simply one stroke in a larger movement of God's Spirit within the congregation, I would not advise attempting to revitalize the church. That is, unless you are willing to stay there for many, many years (the subject of a later post).

People are often deceived by our story at the Summit. I came to the Summit (at that time, Homestead Heights Baptist) in January 2002. In the first month we successfully suggested the name change. Within 1 year we had moved to sell the property, change the constitution, and redo almost all the programming. We have moved locations twice, added 3 new campuses, and purchased multiple properties. In all of our moves, changes, and purchases, we've never had less than a 99% affirmative vote.

What people DON'T see is that God had taken the church through a rather painful winnowing for the 3.5 years prior to my coming on as pastor. The church was in an interim, and there was a lot of turmoil about what direction the church wanted to go. Many, many people left. By the time I took the helm in 2002, the 300 or so that remained were ready to go and do whatever it took to reach people. They are still some of the most godly, patient, courageous people I've ever been around. They have, for the most part, remained by us through all kinds of change. Within a month of my coming, all the people who DIDN'T agree with the vision had already left. Voting me in as pastor was the decision by the congregation that they wanted to go forward. Furthermore, I had been at the church for 2 years as an associate pastor, prior to becoming the senior pastor. I was a "known quantity" when I started to lead.

In other words, I did not come in with my cape flapping in the wind, flash my silver Lone Ranger badge, play my magical flute, and everyone hypnotically follow me. I was simply one stroke in a movement GOD was doing in the church. I was not the cause of the movement, I was a reflection of it.

Yes, I led a large part of the changes. I introduced new vision and some fresh ideas. I had to do a lot of persuading. I've had lots of people leave in anger over the years. Still, I can say, without a drop of false humility, that God was the major player in our revitalization. I was one of many instruments.

I would not suggest, generally speaking, staying somewhere and trying to revitalize when you don't see the signs of God working independently, and larger, than you. Yes, there are exceptions. But, this is a case where I think Henry Blackaby who wrote Experiencing God got it right. Discover where God is working, and go join Him in it. Pray with Moses or Jonathan or any number of the Bible heroes, "God, I won't go up, unless you go with me."

If God is not doing it, I would suggest, in most cases, not to waste your life by banging your head against the wall with stubborn, stiff-necked religious people who don't want to be led. I know God calls some people to preach people who will never listen (Jeremiah and Isaiah) and others to lead people who will never follow (Joshua). Every pastor faces real difficulties with his people, and real shepherds don't "flee the sheep" when things get hard. Jesus stuck by his deadbeat disciples when they all deserted Him, laying down His life for them! But, that said, I would not voluntarily "waste my life" by trying to lead people who don't want to be led because they are not really converted, are hard-hearted, and really ought to be disciplined out of the church anyway... that is, when the fields of lost people are "white unto harvest." Go plant. Find a fertile field and invest your life there. You've only got one life, and there are billions of lost people.

Now... be gracious with what I said... I know you can abuse and misapply it. I'll add some balance in my next post.

Should You Revitalize a Church, or Plant a New One?

If you haven't heard, Durham is hosting the first ever "Advance 09: the Resurgence of the Local Church" conference at the Durham Performing Arts Center June 4-6, featuring a whole slew of great speakers, including Mark Driscoll, John Piper, Matt Chandler, Ed Stetzer, Bryan Chappell, Danny Akin, and a number of others. You can order tickets here. The theme is the advance of the Gospel in the "New Urban South," a whole new cultural phenomenon.

I've been asked to speak during the Friday morning plenary session on "Revitalizing a Church." I've titled my talk "Planting is for Wimps: Revitalizing a Church Around the Gospel." ...Obviously, that is tongue and cheek because our church greatly believes in church planting, believing that it is our mission to plant 1000 in the next 40 years... but, at the same time, our church has a unique story... in that we were a 42 year old "declining" Baptist church that embraced a new mission and "replanted" itself, which led to a new effectiveness in ministry. Because of that, we were able to have the "freshness of planting" with a piece of property (worth about 4 million) and a core group of 300. That's a pretty "well resourced" plant, if you know what I mean!

I have had a lot of discussions recently on whether or not you should try to "revitalize a church" or go plant. Obviously, different situations will require different solutions, and only God can tell you, but I will share a number of thoughts in the coming posts... and would love your feedback. Here's an opening thought.

Thought #1: Ask, "What exactly am I trying to rescue in attempting to revitalize this church?"

You should only revitalize a church out of care for its present members and excitement about its future potential, not because of its institutional glory in the past. Many times we want to "revitalize" a church because we (or others) remember how great the church used to be. We (rightly so) are saddened by seeing a once thriving church in decline. So, we want to "save" the institution and restore it to its glory days. However, I believe you should look at any particular "local church" as simply the people who are CURRENTLY attending, not as an institutional legacy.  Local churches are contemporary covenant communities, and always in flux. A local church is a type of institution, but no one local church is an institution that lasts forever. Jesus died to redeem the one, universal church and will preserve that forever. Local covenant communities are essential to the plan of God, but they only consist of the present members, not the historical legacy. In heaven, there will be no "Summit Church," "First Baptist Dallas," "Redeemer Presbyterian," etc. So, if you want to "revitalize" a church, do so because of care for its present members or excitement over its potential future, but never as an attempt to restore the institutional glory of the past.

What about trying to revitalize a church to save the property? This is tricky... because on the one hand, you hate to see the sacrifices of previous generations go to waste, and millions of dollars of property once dedicated to kingdom purposes be "lost." In some cases it is most certainly wise to spend the time "saving" the property. However, on the other hand, here are two reasons why trying to rescue "the property" is not as important: 1. The Bible repeatedly instructs us that we should look to God today to meet the needs for the ministry we are doing today.  The story of God's provision in the manna shows you that God does not want us to depend on His provision yesterday for what we need today. We do not need to depend on the resources of yesterday to take the Kingdom forward today. 2. Practically speaking, you will (in many if not most cases) waste a number of years of your life and a lot of money trying to redeem the property, money and time that could be better spent starting something new.

*This is the first of several posts discussing whether or not you should seek to revitalize a church, or plant a new one instead. Here are parts 2, 3, and 4.