Not long ago a blogger who had faced some difficult times in his ministry wrote: “I would rather be a missionary in the most dangerous, anti-Christian place in the world than try to revitalize an existing, traditional Southern Baptist church.” Though I don’t personally know that blogger, I have friends who share his sentiment and lean the direction of church planting.
I myself have been tempted by the wiles of church planting (don’t jump on me about the temptation language—I value church planting, I’m just trying to be cute!), but have chosen the route of pastoring in established and traditional Southern Baptist churches. Call me a glutton for punishment…
And I speak as one who has gone through the pain of being forced to resign from a church that was, at best, a terrible situation. While in seminary, I pastored a small country church in south-central Indiana. It had little structure, an out of tune piano, a liberal-leaning lady who ran the show, and hardly any men. It actually proved to be a great experience. In the course of three years, I grew as a pastor and preacher, the church doubled in size without any formal outreach efforts, giving went up, and though I disagreed with several people on certain points of theology (and politics!) they loved me and I loved them. It was a good beginning.
Then…I graduated and decided to head in the direction of home (Missouri). I ended up at a church in Southeast MO, it was my first fulltime pastorate, and I thought I would be there for years to come. Boy, was I wrong. Less than a month in, red flags started flying. A lot of what I wanted to do was undercut with talk behind my back while people smiled to my face. The problems grew worse and I became more isolated and disenfranchised, yet I determined to stick it out since I was sure God placed me there. Finally, after eight months they dismissed me complete with a series of events that left me feeling manipulated, lied to, and angry. It doesn’t help when they try to send your character through the shredder and tell you, “We think you’re a great teacher, but you’re a terrible pastor.”
At the age of 27 I was jobless and homeless (the church had a parsonage), and forced to move back in with my parents (thus, also, humbled). Emotionally I was exhausted and spiritually I was bitter. A good friend of mine invited me to a young adult Bible Study at his church, and I went determined to be as silent as possible and to not let anyone know I had been a pastor…because I just needed to hear other people talk about God for a while. And it started the process of healing.
Yet with the experience, I was on the verge of dropping the pastoring thing, especially with established churches (the one I grew up in for the first 20 years of my life saw its own slew of problems that are permanently stuck in my mind as well). But I couldn’t shake the feeling that was where I belonged. And here I am, nearly three years later, pastor of another established and traditional SB church (albeit on the opposite side of the state)… It has its issues and problems, and several areas concerning doctrine and practice that serve as potential points of a split if poorly handled. And I’m happy here. In part it is because we have started a new discipleship paradigm and I am spending a lot of time with individuals and small groups (especially a group of men), training them on what it means to live the gospel and apply it to their families and others they might mentor. They’re excited, I’m excited, it will be a slow process, but there’s great potential.
But I wouldn’t be here now if not for the fact that I love working in established churches…so what draws me to them? Two things:
First, Ephesians 1:3-14. It doesn’t matter how rough around the edges we are, it doesn’t matter how young or immature in our faith we might be, it doesn’t matter our problems or our issues…if we are saved by the grace of God, then God has blessed us with every spiritual blessing and he has destined us to become holy and blameless people who receive a great inheritance. This is true with churches and individual Christians: we should look at them not for what they are, but for what God is shaping them to be. No church is perfect, nor is any church plant. Every established church was a plant, and every plant if it survives will become an established church steeped in its own traditions. Yet they all fit into this passage. I’m not going to be naïve about the potential issues in a church (especially not after the experiences I’ve had), and as much as I would love to focus solely on the people who want to be growing disciples, I’ll also have to deal with the Pharisees and snakes when they slither out from under their rocks. That’s life. But I choose to see the deep-down potential in God’s work more than the cracks and blemishes.
And second, 2 Timothy 4:1-5…especially in terms of the word “patience.” When working with individuals in discipleship you are faced with the reality: spiritual growth, maturity, and sanctification are slow. There are questions that sometimes get asked 40 different times in 20 different ways. People struggle with sin and fail constantly. There are ample misunderstandings, occasional laziness, and rampant busyness. Pride rears its ugly head far more than humility. And a lot of people think they know more about the Bible than what they actually do know. It takes a lifetime to even begin to become like Jesus. And if that’s true for the individual, how much more is it for a church filled with 50, 100, 2000, or 10000 individuals? It takes patience and understanding, and even times where we must “endure suffering.”
I value and support church planting. It is a needed mission and ministry where churches do not exist. But the established churches need love too, even if they are sometimes hard to get along with.
Mike, if you are going to plagiarize my life story, please get my permission first. The only difference in this story between my reality and yours was that I had enough support to survive the meeting and not get fired. I also made some of the best friends of our lives during those years of wandering in the wilderness.
You learn a lot in those times.
Hey, I served that church! Granted it had a different name, and was in a different state, but it was the same church.
Seriously: have you factored in the concept of healthy verses dysfunctionlity in the church? From 1986 through 2004, I served dysfunctional churches–all but the first deliberately, as that became my ministry. All churches, being composed of human beings, have problems (ranging from minor to major) from time to time. There are situations in which the “match” between church and pastor is simply not a good match, and it is more a matter of leadership style and expectations than theology, even if that differs. But at some point a church (or any organization) becomes dysfunctional. Consultants rate churches on a scale of one to five, with “one” being you average church, with the occasional temper tantrum and/or argument, usually at or around business meetings, and “five” being where fistfights breakout. My worst church was a 4.5 on that scale (and they nearly killed me–literally). My point is simply that a healthy church, even with problems, has to be pastored differently from a dysfunctional church. And the pastor’s ecpectations need to be different also, else he will be disappointed.
John Fariss
Was it in South Boston? Cause the one I’m talking about was 20 miles from there.
In my short life, I’ve been a part of 6 churches in various ways… only one of those would I describe as “healthy” (the church I went to while in college) and that’s because the pastors who were there brought them out of dysfunctionality and into healthiness through patience, prayer, a whole lot of teaching the Word, and discipleship… Add that to all the stories I’ve heard/hear from other pastors and I have great doubts about the existance of too many non-dysfunctional churches! 🙂
But your point is true: some churches take a whole lot more foundation building and ground work than others… and some pastors are better at laying foundations while others are better at building structures upon those foundations.
That church that ran me off…before I got there when I was asking around I was told by other pastors and the DOM: “Oh, it’s a good church with a lot of potential.” After I got there they looked at me and said: “Sorry.”
Since then I’ve learned not to let my expectations be shaped by search committees, former pastors, DOM’s or other pastors… rather I’ve come to expect–there’s going to be good points, there’s going to be bad points… let’s roll up the sleeves and have some fun!
Wouldn’t it be grand if they had told you the truth and nothing but the truth on those folks!!!!
No church will ever be perfect, but there is such a thing as a reasonable group of people trying to serve God rather than themselves.
The best dysfunctional church I ever served was in South Boston, Virginia. The worst dysfunctional church I ever served was in Hickory, NC–I had a heart attack there, mostly stress-related. Another pastor died of a heart attack, a music minister and I think a youth minister were both committed, others had various health problems, and all but two (myself and a youth minister who served only two years) were either fired or forced to resign, as far back as at least the 1950s. Some of these, the church leadership readily admitted, were not for cause, but simply because they “decided to clean house” or to fire the whole staff when they believed they had cause to fire one person.
John
Here’s a view from the member-of-the-established-church perspective. I’ve been a member of the same tiny SBC church in Northern NY for all my Christian life (almost 30 years). I love the church, and the people, and when we get a new pastor, I often feel like telling them “Run, run for your life if you know what is good for you!!” The large percentage of our members is one extended family (which I married into). That can (and has) cause problems. Gossip is a real issue. We are very hard on pastors. Our record for a pastor stay is 7 years. We have folks who will back the pastor, no matter what. And folks who will oppose the pastor, no matter what. Of necessity, our pastors must be bi-vocational. We are also a little out of the SBC mold in that we have elders and allow female deacons. All this makes it very hard to attract and retain people in the frozen north. I’m very anti-mega-church, but I can see the allure of anonymity afforded members of a mega-church. The weight of a small church can be crushing. (that sounds odd, doesn’t it?)
Mike,
Good, interesting article.
I’ve don’t see any reason why some would criticize a man being called to pastor an established, traditional church. Nor do I see any reason to criticize a man called to begin a new church. Or, at times to do both. Both are obviously in the plan of God. God prepares each of us in different ways. And a preacher has to have some toughness, and wisdom, either way.
God bless all you guys that are pastoring a church, new or traditional. It’s one of the best, and at times one of the toughest, jobs in the world.
David R. Brumbelow
Mike,
I hear you brother, been there for sure. I believe what really needs to happen in our convention is for the dying church to give up it’s facilities and let a committed core group come in an “repot” or “replant” the church. There’s a good article about this in the recent issue of OnMisson magazine. Most of these churches are already dead, they just haven’t had the funeral yet. Why continue doing this over and over to young pastors and their families? I serve as a bi-vocational church planter and it would have to be a burning bush scenario for me to ever go back to an established church.
As an eleven year member of an SBC church in California I would offer a comment of support for the post. Our church was once active and vibrant. It is now a senior dominated church of forty or so. No mortgage, cash in the bank. Twenty years of a lack of pastoral and lay vision and leadership (among many other things) has resulted in a tired, dispirited congregation surrounded by thousands of people who need to gospel.
I suspect our profile matches hundreds (probably thousands) of SBC churches across the country.
I think I appreciate the enticement of church planting. Starting from scratch has its advantages.
But please don’t think that all small, long established churches are a minefield for aspiring pastors. There are some which continue to pray and trust for Godly leadership. That is the prayer of most of our church. But after years of inertia and few signs of spiritual activity, a sort of low grade spiritual depression sets in. You start to think it will never get better. Our church, for one, would welcome a relatively inexperienced pastor who loved people and was committed to a long term relationship. At least I hope that is true.
Thank you for your post.
I appreciate this article.
The one who said he would rather be overseas in danger than in an est. church here isn’t over the bitterness of his past situation, I’d guess.
There are some churches that are pastor-killers but not a great proportion.
I was surprised and a bit angry years ago when the state convention’s staff guy who handled resumes and pastor Established, tradition anchored churches with social structures, power structures and the like already locked in aren’t for everyone. But they ar
After 30 plus years and several beatings, I’ve decided to take a new approach in my final years of service. I’ve done both: radical church starts and traditional SBC.
I’m in a very traditional church. I’m following a pastor who had been at the church for 37 years. In California, this is absolutely unheard of for the most part. He’s a good friend and still preaches for me when he comes to town. He was very conservative and the church is very conservative
But, the church is very mission minded. They want to reach 20 Somethings and have voted to start a mission on Sunday nights. So, I get to start a radical mission with radical music and pastor an established, traditional church for us old folks. Seems like a match made in heaven.
I can almost hear God saying, “He’s had enough trouble and deserves a break!!!”
I feel I have had the same God treatment!
Another key issue in success is the wilingness of your predecessor to let go the rope and be your main source of help. Few seem to be able to manage this one too.
Blessings on your ministry and may it be a great surce of healing and joy. Hope your arthritis of older years doesn’t stop your hand clapping and foot stomping with the band!!!
Gene, one of the reasons my predecessor was able to have 37 years of fulfilling ministry (a few as the second fastest growing church on the West Coast) was because he is a master at conflict management.
He was willing to take years to solve a problem instead of letting it destroy his ministry. I think that is a great sign of leadership.
I tend to be a “matter-of-fact-tell-it-like-it-is-let-the-chips-fall-where-they-may-get-it-done-now” kind of guy. I hope I am learning to have a little more “grace with my truth” (in the same order as with the Lord Jesus).
And, if I get to where I can’t stomp my foot, I’ll buy a wooden shoe and tap the pew.
Sadly, churches are not perfect because people are not perfect!!!
Too many of us who become the new pastor tend to think we have the perfect answers and people should just listen to us and all will be good!
I have found more joy in bi-vocational pastoring than in the large churches I served for the first 12 or so years of my paid ministry. When you get paid and dependent on a church for housing and income you have 2 basic choices: Comply with their expectations / defy them and get crunched.
It is interesting you speak of “Pharisees coming from under the rocks.”
The worse thing that has happend to me in the initial contact phase is former pastors who won’t admit “this is a very sick and hateful church to pastor.” My worst untruth was from an older pastor who said, “They are just normal and I have had a good ministry here.”
A truthful answer would have been: “I have kissed up to a few / used my membership as a Mason to get by / my sick and terminally ill son kept me from being put on the street / I have escaped by the skin of my teeth / God has rescued me from these monsters.”
It was an FBC with the largest congregation in a small town. Its leaders had serious moral and personal issues. Many were split from one another and trying to get me to take sides. The Deacons once made up their mind on an issue to recommed to the Called Conference–and when it was presented with me moderating, one declared they did not say that! Upon examination of their minutes to show they did, they changed the minutes to reflect what they claimed! That is the height of pastoral problems!!!
Now, some good Deacons who could throw oil on troubled waters, could have solved the problems, but there were none! I have reached the conclusion that “church success” depends more on the spirit of the church and its leaders than on the abilities of a Pastor. In some situations I have found the “successful” Pastor to be the one who told people what they wanted to hear over what the Bible clearly says on relational matters. My biggest problems came from preaching accurately with good illustrations what the Bible clearly says over what I and they wanted it to say!
There are certain churches which deserve to become pastorless because they have tried to destroy the last 7! Pastors know it, but refuse to divulge it on the assumption they can find a “better church.” As I review God’s place in my calls to far more good churches than bad ones, I see how 2 of the bad ones deserved someone who would stand for God and the Bible in his preaching and living–that’s right, I got fired twice—but God always provided another and better place of service. In the 2 cases hell would have been a better alternative, but God used the situations to let people have a clear vision of exactly who and what group was the cause of the turmiol.
In one case, I simply moved on. In another we started a much-needed new church in the community.
So, at age 64, I speak the words of Paul: “I have fought a good fight / I have kept the faith / henceforth there is laid up for me heavenly reward.” In that verse is the heart of being a good Pastor. It’s not in worldly and numerical succes. it has to do with fighting only when necessary / keeping FAITH / trusting God.
Hang in there, young man! Learn from any human mistakes = we all have made them. Pray that God has Christ’s followers among the Deacons of any church. A truthful and gentle Deacon who helps solve problems rather than make them is your angel from above. Churches with such are a pleasure and delight giving you the GIFT OF SUCCESS far beyond your ability to create that gift!!!
“”When you get paid and dependent on a church for housing and income you have 2 basic choices: Comply with their expectations / defy them and get crunched””
Herein lies the great fallacy in your thinking (which shows up often). The “excluded middle,” or “false dichotomy.”
You have a very low view of people and obviously from your history have low skills in dealing with people. You rationalize away your own weak leadership skills by blaming “hateful churches.”
Believe me, I’ve seen some “hateful churches” over the last 32 years. I was well on my way to becoming jaded and hateful toward ministry like you are. Only be God’s grace have I been able to stick it out now heading into my fourth decade.
I’ve discovered that there are very few “hateful churches” (though there are no doubt some). Our choice in paid ministry is not just capitulation or conflict. Love never fails and leading from a strong sense of self-giving love, can go a long way to turning around a church that has lost its way. Leadership is the “excluded middle” in your analysis.
I think you are wise to recognize that you are not cut out to pastor a church where you are dependent upon others for your daily sustenance. I applaud you for that but caustion you not to keep blaming God’s bride because your engagement did not lead to a happy marriage.
SSBN / Joe–
Why is it you guys never quit???
I make a reasonable statement. You restate / mistate such and start your tyrade!!! What’s the problem????
Did you not read that only 2 of some 12 churches were a problem?
So—let’s be positive = what have been your statistics and how are you dealing with the rejection and insults you have endured as a minister of the Gospel????
I can’t believe that in a blog where honesty and sharing has been totally present thus far, you want to bite me when we have all been bitten by hurtful church people!!!
Shame!!!!
Answer my question, then I’ll answer yours!!!!
Obviously, Gene, you are not interested in dialogue. I’ve answered your question twice now, and each time you come back whining about personal attacks.
By the way, I did see your “2 out of 12” statistic, but oddly that statistic has different meanings for you and me. You follow-up that “minimalist” assessment with a stronger generalization in regard to anyone who relies on others for “income and housing.” You are jaded which makes it hard for you to think objectively about this subject.
I will say this: I will pretty much guarantee that I have endured difficulties in the ministry in the form of personal and professional attacks that you would be hard-pressed to find anything like it in SBC life. I know that of which I speak more personally than I like to remember.
First, I dealt with it by revisiting my call to ministry in the form of a vision I had 34 years ago in the jungle of Guam in the dead of night. This allowed me to assess the situation, face clearly my own short-comings, and move forward to continue my ministry.
Secondly, I stayed very close to a couple of fellow preachers who loved me and prayed for me.
Thirdly, I did what I had to do to provide for my family. God provided a two-year job in education that was both refreshing and quite satisfying.
Fourth, and perhaps most important, I simply refused to become jaded by the evil actions of a noisy minority. This was the hardest step in the process. Forgiveness is always a hard thing.
Fifth, I have come to realize that I am a “John the Baptist” type person (though with not so great a character as his). I believe I am in that “gap” between an entrepeneurial spirit and a traditional pastor. I’m almost schizophrenic in that regard. I’m learning how to fulfill the former without destroying the latter. Give me ten more years and I’ll let you know how I’ve done.
Sorry, Gene. I just read what you wrote. I do not think it is too far amiss to say that you consistently are negative in regard to your church experience. If that is not what you mean to convey, then perhaps you should check your language.
I answered your question in a very honest and positive way from my own experience, but your presuppositions fell down over your eyes so you could not see.
It’s interesting that I simply pointed out your fallacy in logical reasoning and you take offense at that. I think if you read back over your thousands of posts you will see a consistent tendency to use hasty generalization, incorrect causation, and an excluded middle in order to bolster your presuppositional points.
As to statistics: it has been my experience that 100% of SBC ministers have voluntarily accepted their assignment. No one I know of has been forced to serve or forced to stay. That’s why I say that “leadership” is your excluded middle. If things are not working out, a good leader will know when to move on. The problem is that many pastors engage in battles that cannot be won, or won without very significant collateral damage.
I’ve made that mistake so I am speaking from experience. I’m sorry that you only feel your experiences are valid. I tried to compliment you on your discovery that you lack the skills necessary to pastor a full time established church.
So—let’s be positive = what have been your statistics and how are you dealing with the rejection and insults you have endured as a minister of the Gospel????
Answer my question, then I’ll answer yours!!!!
So, at age 64, I speak the words of Paul
You believe that mormons worship the same Jesus that Christians do. You believe muslims have faith that will save them. Therefore, you do not know the gospel, have not “fought the good fight” or “kept the faith” because you are not a Christian.
“”preaching accurately””
If you indeed did this, then whatever result you received you should be giving God glory and thanks.
However, if you mean you just “told ’em like it is” with no real concern for their souls, then expect a few sheep will react by biting.
I’m not sure what “preaching accurately” really means, especially coming from someone who believes the Bible is full of errors. Somehow, I see a disconnect.
Please enlighten me as to what it means to “preach accurately.”
Michael #7, You’re right on target here from an experience my son had but particularly in regard to a new pastor out of seminary with his family including children who believes he has been called into this church that God left a long time ago. A minister’s association could inform these new people and teach both some life saving lessons. SBC or State Conventions could attack this problem with cold hard facts to students as well as to churchs hopefully making both more productive. This is the most beneficial and professional Blog from my standpoint I’ve seen here. Can’t wait to read more.
Gene Scarbouough, I feel I am entitled to tell you that I believe what you say as truth as you make too much sense concerning areas of which I do have some knowledge. You’ve been strongly accused and come back for more. I think you are a strong man which is willing to uphold your principles when it’s far easier another way. Some of my son’s best supporters have been in the black community where they have paid the price and he will work his situation out.
Jack—
That’s part of the reason I stay with this rough bunch on this blog = I have no aspiration for a big SBC church / my ministry is to individuals where I don’t have to play games.
What was that old song: “When you know you’re right, then go ahead.”
My father taught me as a small child by word and action: “See with your own eyes / hear with your own ears / think with your own brain / even if you are the only one seeming to see it that way, stick with your own conscience between you and God. He’ll let you know if you are wrong in due time, but until he does, keep on plugging!”
I appreciate your confidence in me. Such is never earned easily!!! I’m just not easily intimidated—and sometimes wish I were.
Jack,
I agree with you. I believe the whole process in a church calling a pastor is fatally flawed. A man is called for an interview from a resume and answers questions the way they want to hear. The search team tells the pastor all the things he wants to hear. He preaches ONE sermon, the church who knows nothing of him, votes him in and that’s a good match? Then a few months later they both realize they made a mistake. The problem is a church can find a new pastor fairly quickly and has nothing to lose. The pastor’s search to find another church can take up to 2 years or more. All the while he figures out how to take care of his family. How do we change it? I don’t know, but it’s bad business all the way around.
Michael,
I agree… the way we are calling pastors is “bad business all the way around.”
http://gritsgrace.blogspot.com/2009_12_01_archive.html
Michael–
I think you are a little oprimistic as to the time taken for a preacher-killing church to find another victim. Anymore, many of us are asking as a main question: “How long is the average tenure of you previous pastors / what is the reason the last 3-5 left?”
Good ministers have choices, especially if they are not tying themselves to full time ministry. God has always provided for me.
In addition, my father’s admonition that when God says, “Vengence is mine.” he means it!!! You don’t have to straighten them out, but God certainly will and just might see to their closure for lack of spiritual vitality when there are many choices for people to find a faith group these days.
Another factor is the number of Intentional Interims who are available to help a church analyse its preacher-killing ways. NC has a trained group of such and they have helped many churches stop their horrid ways of eating their Pastors.
Mike, great article! the last couple of paragraphs were so valuable and hopefully we all take them to heart in our everyday dealing with one another as Christians. I am prone to lean on Philippians 1:6 and realize I am not the only one in the kingdom of God with whom Jesus is working to complete. Makes living with the rest of the world a bit easier for me… Ministries behind us…a mix of all you said in your post. But in the final analysis, I wouldn’t change anything but me if we had them to do over again. selahV
Reading the title, I was wondering if you could define an “established” and “unestablished” church?
The quote at the beginning of this article came from me and I still hold to it. Since I left the established traditional church on October 31, I can say that the past six weeks have been the most fulfilling in my entire ministry. It is wonderful to meet each week with like-minded believers who are serious about their faith. We have outgrown meeting in the homes and God has provided us a wonderful meeting space at our local YMCA.
Here’s another quote for you from my 35 year-old son, Rob: “I would rather go to church with 20 people who are serious about their faith than 2,000 who are not.” I totally agree with him. He’s a smart boy. Gets it from his mother. 🙂
While traditional churches focus on themselves and dies a slow, agonizing death, I believe they will be replaced with new, healthy churches that are serious about denying themselves, dying to self, depending on Christ, discipling themselves and others, and departing to the mission field.
Regards,
Les
I actually think I would enjoy pastoring a non-traditional church. However, your comment leaves some impressions that, if intentional, are unfair.
Are you meaning to imply that non-traditional church people are serious about their faith but traditionalists are not?
Do you mean to imply that traditionalists are not serious about their faith?
Are you saying that all traditional churches are dying a slow death because they focus only on themselves.
In my experience, there are some non-traditional churches that are no more serious about “dying to self, depending on Christ, discipling themselves and others” or “departing” anywhere.
In short, I think the problems you mentioned are not necessarily systemic to traditional churches nor absent in those that are non-traditional.
Les, I totally agree with your comment. But not for the reasons you might assume. I am still in the traditional church but have added a more organic form of ekklesia to my life that is free from the concerns about paid staff, new carpet, sound systems, programs or manufactured church growth strategies or even planned “services”. Every member of the Body functions in some capacity.
I would not call it “established” but more organic in nature. It is more Jesus centered than anything I have ever been involved with before. And I have been in a ton of “established” churches. Someday we might give up the institution which is looking more and more man centered all the time.
Dave Miller:
You said to Les:”I actually think I would enjoy pastoring a non-traditional church. However, your comment leaves some impressions that, if intentional, are unfair.”
I agree. Hopefully he will clarify some of his statements.
My sense is that his comments universalized his experience. Perhaps the things he said were true in the particular church or churches he served, but that does not make his experience a universal truth.
I don’t think the problem is simply church structure, but is the people who operate that style.
“I don’t think the problem is simply church structure, but is the people who operate that style.”
After all my years in Org Development, I can tell you that is not really how it works. It might for a season with a charismatic style of leadership but structure eventually dictates function. Always has and always will.
The problem with the church is that it is structured like the worldly systems. It is inbred in us and hard to break that paradigm that Jesus Christ, not a human, is the boss.
Lydia, I’m interested in your “organic” experience. I’ve recently read Pagan Christianity. My first impression is that there’s a lot of “throwing the baby out with the bath water” it seems to me that one problem that could possibly arise with a more organic approach is that in any group of humans there are always those who will dominate and take over and those who willingly sit back and allow themselves to be led. Now I understand that a group of Christians should be able to get together with an attitude of all are to be servents, but it seems the practical reality is that when groups of people get together that unintentionally you will have some leading/following? Personally, I wasn’t convinced by Viola’s arguments that everything we might label “traditional” is absolutely wrong, but I do think there’s a place for what we might label “organic” I think of the universal church as the body of Christ so a traditional church may be an arm and an organic church may be another arm. There are strenghts and weakness either way. I know a lot of the quiverful cults go the way of house churches a lot of times so that’s a probalem, but certainly not an indictment against all house churches.
“Now I understand that a group of Christians should be able to get together with an attitude of all are to be servents, but it seems the practical reality is that when groups of people get together that unintentionally you will have some leading/following?”
I think that is true but it does not have to be static as it always is in the traditional venue. That is where I think the problem lies. And, we must not forget that we are talking about understanding that believers are to be led by the Holy Spirit. Does not happen right away but that should be the outcome. Someday, we are going to have to come to grips with the fact it is not just about following Christ but CHRIST IN US. The goal should be adult- mature- seasoned believers. Not always followers of a human.
I am not necessarily talking about “house church” but it can be. And I agree some house churches are cults and elevate non salvic doctrines to salvic levels. But that comes from following humans, too. That is the root problem.
As far as “house church” is concerned, I think more folks are looking at that because they see little value in maintaining the buildings and staff as necessary. But once again, I am very involved in traditional church so I am on both sides of this issue.
PC only validated what I had been studying about church history which was a bloody evil mess.
It sounds like you would agree that the more organic means of worship are best engaged where “mature” believers are involved. My experience or should I say what I see happening is these bully personalities latching onto the organic movement and using it to make up their own followings. So I think the danger is these personalities in a traditional setting who cause a lot of problems in that setting saying “You’re doing it wrong and I’m gonna go off and do it right.” So it would seem like (and I admit my knowledge is limited) that the same problems people have with “traditional” forms of worshipping would begin to crop up when you see more “organic” forms of worshipping.
Bess, what is an ‘organic’ Church?
L’s my understanding and perhaps Lydia can help out here is “organic” worship is something that is natural without order or plan. A group of Christians get together and anyone who has a word can share or if someone would like to sing can sing, or whatever portions of the Bible are speaking to a person may be discussed. It’s Spirit led where a group of Christians come together. No leaders, no parameters like an order of service.
The House Church is a good and interesting concept. I am seeing many of them forming as people tire of the mega church being lost in the crowd. Many seem to feel the mega is all about money and show and they want more.
Most operate in the fashion you describe. They seem to next move to a storefront for some kind of formal place to meet.
I think it is a renewal of the real nature of the first Chritians who sought to worship Christ and serve one another.
No matter what, God’s Holy Spirit is alive and well and there will always be a place when God is trying to come into our lives in a real way.
At the same time Satan is working hardest to bring in personality conflict and egos wanting a place to be stroked. It has been my experience that Satan pretty much leaves sick approaches to following Christ alone. In fact, some of the really big shows just keep people distracted from the still small voice of God directing them to the quiet lost people dying to be loved and forgiven.
Bess, your description of an ‘organic’ Church reminds me of the Society of Friends’ meetings (the Quakers).
Very quiet, sometimes someone speaks a word, if they feel led to do it. Peaceful.
Don’t know anything about the Quakers except that Richard Nixon claimed to be one???
I can see the attraction of the more organic worship experience and mostly what I’ve heard/read has been what I would consider pretty solid Biblically. There are dangers I think of bullies taking over and cultic practices – but that’s true in the traditional settings as well. I have not been convinced that we have to give up the traditional methods completely. I guess I would be confortable with a marriage of the two. Most of the Pastors/church leaders I’ve known have genuinely wanted to do what they consider Biblical, but I think like everything humans to we can fall into ruts and get off track.
I have had the priviledge of serving on the church staff of a non-traditional church plant in the US, starting a few churches in S America and pastoring three traditional churches in the US. Each was completly different from the other and the one common trait among them all was that each had its share of joy and trials. Some are easier than others and I thank God for His grace when I am in a good situation, but “traditional” churches are great places to do ministry, it just depends on which traditional church you are in. I know the horrors of church conflict and could add to the list above. Even now I know several brothers recently forced out of the pastorate and more in the process of being forced out, but let’s remember that there are many good, healthy, solid traditional churches. Also remember that many church plants are also terribly dysfunctional. I think we need to look for a good fit between church and pastor. How this fits in with the sovereignty of God I’m not sure, but I encourage everyone to find a good fit.
Bill
“It sounds like you would agree that the more organic means of worship are best engaged where “mature” believers are involved.”
I did not communicate that well at all. What I meant is that becoming a mature seasoned believer “eating meat” and being led by the Holy Spirit is the desired outcome from time with the ekklesia. It is harder for that to happen when one is always a spectator in crowd. I am not saying it cannot happen.
We try to stay within a sort of 1 Corin 14 process which provides interaction and testing what is taught by others:
29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge. 30 But if anything is revealed to another who sits by, let the first keep silent. 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be encouraged. 32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 33 For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.
Unfortunately, it seems that it would still take more maturity than a lot of the pew sitters have to realize that they are not getting meat by simply sitting in the pew. One problem with the traditional method (and it’s a huge one) is that we are a society that wants our stuff without a lot of work and/or even thought. So many people in the tradtional setting are so focused on what kind of programs the church offers. I think most churches do offer opportunites for a more organic feel, but getting people to actually participate and interact is like pulling teeth in some small groups. And then you have the small groups that are dominated but a few. So I don’t know.
“One problem with the traditional method (and it’s a huge one) is that we are a society that wants our stuff without a lot of work and/or even thought”
Exactly. So we have to ask how much our traditional structure contributes to this or enables it?
Remember, I was involved in the Church Growth Movement and we targeted the “unchurched” in our marketing. That was the focus. We convinced ourselves that included the Gospel. But, if we focus on the Gospel first, the people who believe are compelled to want to be with other believers. They cannot stand not being with other believers. That is the organic part. It does not matter where.
In a traditional setting people are likely to say they are there for the preaching, programs, kids programs, music, etc, or because they were brought up in church. We do know what attracts people to traditional church. They are spectators. ONly a few can really function within their spiritual gifting in that venue. And I have a hard time believing that one person can lead worship. That is the work of the Holy Spirit and I am not saying it happens every time.
Well and with the “marketing” of the church, churches have fallen into the trap of “give them what they want” but not all the leaders (I know you don’t like that concept) want church to be that way. Many people are simply not willing to step out of their comfort zone and take responsibility for their worship. I know just in something which should be as simple as prayer meeting our Pastor is frustrated because he’s tried to have an open prayer time where anyone can pray and only a few will. And I’ve mentioned small groups. So I understand that the traditional church has contributed to the abdication by believers for responsibilty in worship. But I’m not convinced that we should abandon traditional worship – I enjoy corporate worship and like being somewhat a spectator, but I don’t want that to be my only worship experience. I think too many just make Sunday AM the penultimate in their worship when it has to be so much more and I see ministers who understand this and are trying to pull their congregations into more organic styles at different times ie prayer meeting or opening up the sanctury for a time of “sharing” but when people have to start participating you would think you’d asked them to do hard labor.
If I may gentlemen, I’ve travelled the world because I was in the Navy for 20 years. The best Sunday service I have EVER encountered was onboard a U.S. Navy ship, berthed in the Persian Gulf in 1992. It was a glorious Easter Sunrise Service. The ship’s chaplain was a Lutheran (and a woman to boot)! But, there I was in a place where Christianity is anathema to the culture, and I had never experienced God’s presence in my life more fully. The service was poorly attended as was normal. But amidst all denominations that morning, the face of Christ shone brightly. I kept hearing “Seek ye first”……
Both before and after those years, I’ve been through churches (most of them SBC) that have been exceptional and others that were nothing short of chipping away at the joy of the Lord. Yet rarely, did I ever find anything strongly objectionable about the Pastor. The problem wasn’t behind the pulpit, but sitting in front of it. I always thought that we were still in the infancy of our Christian lives, where we still hold on to a fair amount of worldly rebellion.
I do appreciate reading your exchanges about your own experiences in dealing with ‘us’! It’s clear that you all love the Lord and want to grow a flock of Christians who are serious about dicipleship.
I personally have some serious issues with some of the SBC leadership, but I do realize that a great majority of you are faithful men going about the work of the Lord in humility and reverence. You are appreciated and respected.
In His Amazing Grace……………………..
With all due respect for your post there seems something obvious that many are overlooking. You make some great points and I believe they are points that anyone in the ministry should consider. I especially appreciate the point concerning how we should look at others. I wish I had been more willing to listen to the Spirit of God in my own life to have embraced this fact earlier in my ministry. Secondly, I have been blessed to have been influenced much by men faithful in the ministry who have served churches for long periods of time and remained faithful to the call of God in their lives and in ministering to others.
However, I take great issue with how you begin your post. Except for the fact that it is self-serving there seems to be no reason why you called out Les Puryear in such a way. Aside from reading his blog, as I do many others, I do not know him at all. But to quote directly from his blog to further your own post is one of the problems I have with many who blog – they are simply reactionary.
The second half of your post is solid biblical teaching but you built upon the back of someone who is experiencing (possibly/probably) exactly what you experienced a few years ago and your own statement is that you wanted very little to do with the established church at that time.
Blog about the need for pastors to serve in established churches – I am looking for just such a church right now, but there are a myriad of other ways you could have introduced your post. I have no problem with you referencing Les’ post but following upon the other posts that have been on here lately, namely; Dave’s post on ministers working together and Bart Bartman’s post on church planting your introduction left much to be desired.
I have to admit to being a little flummoxed here. Mike is about as gentle as blog posters come. He did not “call out” Les Puryear. He just referenced some Les said publicly. He did not even name Les. Les came on and admitted to the quote. He did not complain that he had been misquoted. He stood by the quote.
It seems you are saying that disagreeing with someone is wrong?
Les actually logged on to AFFIRM the quote!
I think your criticism here against Mike is unfair and misplaced. Mike was gracious while expressing an opinion different than the unnamed blogger (later identified as Les).
I just really struggled with the introduction. Maybe I am oversensitive in this area but I had just read the blog which he quoted a day or two before and it seemed that he was using someone’s misfortune to highlight something he was writing.
Also, while the writer of the quote was unnamed I would suppose that a very high percentage of readers knew immediately of whom he was speaking. With that assumption – yes, on my part – I personally took offense to the beginning of what was overall an excellent article.
I certainly have no problem with people disagreeing and as crazy as this sounds I don’t think I would have had any problem had he paraphrased or possibly even used the quote later in his article. I believe that civil debate is good for the body of Christ but did not like the way it was introduced. I also believe that bloggers (by the way not a recognized word on a blog’s spellchecker) should be called out when something egregious is said. However, we must remember that we are talking of a pastor who has just resigned from his church. I don’t know him personally but my heart hurts for pastors who are in his situation.
By Mike’s own admission concerning what he had personally experienced it seemed to me that by publicly quoting word for word a pastor who has just resigned from his church and then writing a corrective post that he was putting him in a corner. As the son of a pastor, and the son-in-law of a pastor this burned my biscuits.
I didn’t know it was Les until he claimed the quote.
Yeah, if I was wanting to “call him out” I would have named him, linked to his blog, or written this and tried to post it a day or two after he blogged his thoughts.
The words we write in public are for public consumption and discussion. And this was my discussion on what he wrote–aimed not at Les as a person, his character, or his current work, but at a statement and reasoning with which I disagreed.
My point was: I’ve been there too, as have many other pastors, but let’s not trash the car because the tires blew.
Of course, I welcome discussion of my words as well (that’s why I put my name with them)… so thank you for sharing, but I respectfully disagree–if I wanted to be self-serving or to call someone out, I would have approached it a whole lot differently (and I imagine Dave probably wouldn’t have posted it!).
I have written pieces that “called out” another blogger. Not often, but I have. If you write something publicly, it is for public discussion. I try to focus on the content, not the personality, but I have written pieces that directly confront something someone else said.
I do not consider that to be wrong.
In one fairly recent case, DAVID, you were ‘right on’ to do it.
Selah V did not deserve the attack from that blogger at all.
Her post was positively written to ask for helpful ideas.
I do not feel “called out” by the author of the post. He disagrees with my statement and that is his right to do so.
I continue to stand by my statements. And yes, my perspective is based on experience: my personal experience in pastoring four traditional SBC churches and the experience of countless other traditional small church pastors who have poured out their heart to me over the past four years.
Are there traditional churches filled with people who are serious about their faith? I certainly hope so. However, I haven’t seen very many of them. What I do know is that Cornerstone Community Church will be a church of people who are serious about their faith. I hope your traditional SBC church will be the exception to the declining/plateaued rule.
Les
Let’s get back to the basic concept of churches and whether it is better to serve an established one or a new one.
I have served both and each has its features.
The established ones required a period of “getting to know them.” Each was different and some turned out to be far from the picture they gave me in the negotiations. A Pulpit Committee always is the first point of contact. If there is interest on both sides it goes to a visit to the church / preaching a “trial sermon” / and their presenting you their offer for housing / salary / etc. Sometimes there have been 2 at one time and it becomes a difficult decision when both extend a call.
Upon making a decision prayfully, the wise pastor goes with no great “plan” beyond serving God and seeing what the real needs are. This normally takes 18 months to 3 years. In that period it worked best for me to simply get acquainted with as many members as possible in pastoral visits. That has become more difficult as both husband and wife usually work and would rather be left alone for the restricted family time they have. I found announcing your intention to visit resulted in undue strains for the family to have everything “just right.” That gave me a sense of intrusion over just a quick friendly visit not to last more than 20 minutes. If it turned out to be a bad time, you could always excuse yourself in that you have 3-4 more visits for the evening.
After a while I had a sense of God’s leadership as to which directions the established church needed to be led. Sometimes they had different ideas and resistence. The greatest resistence usually came with requests to Deacons to personally minister or for a formal visitation night with many involved. Typically, a traditional church expects the minister to do their dirty work of personal visitation for them.
The 3 “new starts” I was involved in were composed of some 20 people with dreams and hopes to be a more real group of Christ’s followers than other traditional churches.
Over the process of a year or so, leaders appeared and some conflict developed as they wanted to give strong directions to the others. My great challenge was to keep them working together without conflict along with the “give-and-take” of a majority rule group. You always tried to avoid conflict-generating decisions and if you sensed such tried to delay a formal decision as issues sorted themselves out.
I have never been a dictatorial type pastor. It is my belief that everyone should feel ownership of the church over just doing what the Pastor says. I think that was Christ’s way: setting an example of servanthood and ministry and keeping peace among the followers.
Sadly, too many people want church done for them in an entertaining fashion over struggling with real people and real needs to discover what God would have US DO. Many people promised to join the new work “once they were established,” but many opted for the comfort of a large sanctuary / choir / organ / other comforts established in an older work.
A new work is an adventure. An established one can be such too, but the resistance of “we’ve always done it that way” is a constant challenge.
No church is perfect—rather a group of people “claiming” to be Christians, but always having personal motives in the background. The challenge is to inspire people to “seek Christ and his spirit first even if it involves sacrifice of self.”
You know, I think the “getting to know them” period is one of the points of ministarial frustration and church stagnation. I’ve heard a lot of pastors/professors say: don’t try to make major changes until you’ve been there 5-to-10 years…but the average stay for a pastor is what, five years or less?
For most churches one pastor right after another is simply: 1) new face, 2) get to know you period, 3) leave.
At my present church, I decided to do something different to try to break the pattern… I’ve suggested some minor tweaks here and there, but the main focus is to lay the foundation for change through discipleship and leadership development. I’m working with two guys (one teenager, one middle-aged) on one-on-one stuff; and then I have a group of about 12 men (and we’re a church that presently averages ~70-80 on a given Sunday) who meet at my house twice a month for fellowship and discipleship.
Step one with them: get them together and get them talking… we’ve shared some meals and we’re working through Grudem’s “Christian Beliefs”, dicussing what we beleive, why we believe it, and why it matters.
Step two (coming soon) will be to break them into smaller prayer/accountability groups of 3-4 men who get together on their own at least during the weeks we meet as a group.
Step three: identify the leaders that rise up within this process and send them out to find other men to invest in… that one’s still at least a year down the road.
I take 2 Timothy 2:2 as my basis for it, “And what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”
The hope is, by the time we get to years 3-5 it won’t be, “Okay I kinda know you now and you kinda know me, let’s start talking about some changes…” but instead this discipleship paradigm will have spread to these men’s families, to women’s groups, to Sunday Schools/small groups–people will know their Bible more, they’ll be seeking to live the word more, and change will be naturally occuring. Check back with me in 3-5 years and I’ll let you know if it’s working! 🙂
And the cool thing is, I’ve already had some responses along the lines of: “I’ve never really heard of discipleship before and when I have, I had no idea what it was; I’ve never really been taught in Sunday School or small group that I’m supposed to learn these things so I can turn around an invest in somebody else. I’ve always just assumed that was the job of the pastor and deacons.” And the one’s who have said this are already starting that process of looking outward and investing…
I think you are wise in pointing out the average stay time of too many preachers. A real ministry developes over time. On the other hand, staying too long can lead to stagnation and an attempt to “just make them happy until I can retire.
I would hope that any minister goes to an established church with the belief that they need what he has to offer. Should the relationship reach the point where you are bored or don’t see any changes for the better, it would be wise to move on.
I like Helen Keller’s observation: “Life is either a daring adventure or it is nothing.”
I also like how you are relating to a small group with the idea of letting them start descipling groups on their own. It is a Lyman Coleman / relational Bible study idea. After leading a group to get acquainted / develop a sense of trust / relate to how the particular scripture being studied touches your life, then invite new participants with experienced participants leading each new group. He advocates the initial group continue to meet each week in preparation for their own group to meet later in the week to consider the same scripture.
It all gets away from the Sunday Morning Worship where the Pastor entertains for his 20 minutes so everyone can get to the restaurant on time and then proceed to a nap or football game.
A faith group in a rut can be transformed into a group excited about really helping one another as the Spirit leads. If there is no ultimate goal other than love and sharing, the changing circumstances of life keep it fresh.
“”It all gets away from the Sunday Morning Worship where the Pastor entertains for his 20 minutes so everyone can get to the restaurant on time and then proceed to a nap or football game.””
Thank God you are out of full time ministry if that was your approach. It certainly is not my approach or the approach of any pastor I know of personally.
Nearly everytime you post, your departure from the mainstream ministry makes more sense to me. I think it is tragic that you feel the need to paint pastors with such a broad brush of evil intent.
I don’t think that making changes too soon is the problem as making the wrong changes.