Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Church Leadership’ Category

Questions from Scotland

Posted in Christian Missions, Church Leadership, Traveling Thoughts, tagged , on March 9, 2013| 3 Comments »

St_Martin's_CrossMuch of the American conversation among church leaders focuses on the challenges in big churches! As I thought about the questions that I see regularly addressed in minister’s blogs, many of them came with assumptions about their churches that were uniquely American and perhaps unintentionally, but nevertheless, big church questions.  For instance

  • Which is a better kingdom-building strategy, a mother church planting daughter churches, or the multi-campus single church strategy?
  • Which is a better leadership model, a staff-led church or a member-led church?
  • Is Sunday school still the best model or should the teaching of our children be returned to parents and small groups of parents?
  • Worship styles / Seekers worship / and all of those questions.
  • Staffing questions: large hired staff versus volunteers—with all the ensuing involvement questions
  • Ethnically mixed churches versus homogeneous ones—with accompanying language and cultural issues.
  • Leadership issues brought on by generational differences, especially as millennials (and pre-millennials) move toward the first arenas of ministry leadership.

One of the things I love about mission work is that when you are on the real front line of evangelism, it clears the air.  I was just with a small church in Scotland.  You know, I didn’t hear any of these questions on their lips.

Scotland is a country of about 5 million people with a Christian heritage dating back to the second century, though without much history until the sixth or seventh centuries. John Knox led the Scottish Christians out of Roman Catholicism and into the Church of Scotland during the Reformation, so while there is no established church in Scotland, these are still the two largest groupings.

No, that’s not quite right!  While 42% of Scots claim the Church of Scotland and 16% are Roman Catholic, 28% claim no religion. And although 42% claimed membership in the Church of Scotland, the church itself could only account for about 12% of the population as members.  The number quoted to me was 2% of the population attend any Christian worship service on any given week.

It’s not that the Scots have run off into non-western religions, which are represented mostly by the Muslims, Asians, and Indians living in Scotland. And, yes, there is a smattering of occult and even blatant pagan religion, but that’s not where most Scots seem to be.  No, they just are . . .not religious—secular!–not unusually immoral or uncharitable—in fact, there are charity stores and posters everywhere.  And their public schools not only permit, but encourage religious activities and instruction from Christian groups.

I had breakfast with the minister of this small Christian church in Scotland, and I was the guest of a family in this church. Both husband and wife are leaders there as well.  And in none of the hours of conversation that we had, did we talk about any of the questions listed above.

Here are some of the topics with which we wrestled:

  • What do we do when two of the three leadership families in the church have to move away in the same year?
  • How do we give our children what they need when there are only 5-6 children and they are of all different ages?
  • How can we reach out to young families when we are so few young families ourselves?
  • How can one paid minister (only partially from this church and with part coming from the US) take care of the spiritual needs of the members and reach out to seekers?
  • Do we need to recruit workers from America to help out? If so, how would we use them?
  • Where will our children find Christian friends? Who will they marry?  (All of these questions suggest the difficulty of engendering faith in children who grow up where none of their peers believe, of course.)
  • If everybody in the church is involved already, how do we create new growing edges that might encourage growth?
  • The church members, though few, come from every direction across the city, so how do we have strong fellowship and ample opportunity for Bible study and prayer together?
  • How do we integrate the foreign Christians whom we are glad to welcome, but who bring different perspectives, both from their culture and from their home churches that can be very disruptive?

Now, these are not unanswerable questions—nor are they unique to Scotland, but they do seem to be questions of a more basic nature than sometimes make the headlines among Christian thinkers.

And aren’t most of the Christian churches in the world more like the Scottish than like the mega-churches of America?

It won’t hurt all of us to drop back and make sure we are addressing foundational questions, even as our churches grow!

Read Full Post »

Is Your Church Viable? Part 2

Posted in Church Leadership, tagged , , on January 14, 2013| 2 Comments »

marketplacePreviously, I discussed the first two of Michael E. Porter’s five forces which he suggested were essential for analyzing whether the marketplace environment would work favorably for a business or against it.  If you did not read the first post on this topic, then you may want to read it first. (You can find the link just above this post.)

And for those who did, you’ll remember that the first two forces and the questions they raised were as follows:

1.    Threat of New Competition:  Profitable markets that yield high returns will attract new firms. This results in many new entrants, which eventually will decrease profitability for all firms in the industry.

Question: Is the proliferation of new church plants simply covering up the fact—perhaps even contributing in a strange way—that Christianity in the U.S. particularly is declining?

2.    Threat of substitute products or services: How easy is it for the buyer to switch to a different product? The easier to switch, then the more likely to switch and make your organization less profitable.

Question:In an attempt to be relevant and more accessible, are Christian churches becoming less differentiated, therefore, more susceptible to our “customers” switching to alternatives?

Now we are ready to move on to the last three forces recognized by Porter:

3.    Threat of competitive rivalry: “Rivalry occurs because one or more competitors either feels the pressure or sees the opportunity to improve its position. The actions of one firm are felt by others who then retaliate. Retaliation can take the form of price competition, advertising competition, changes to the distribution or other means” (Cafferky 13). Lip service is often given among churches and religious organizations to the belief that “there is no competition among lighthouses.”  How would your congregation feel if another Christian church started a new plant with a charismatic leader across the street from your site? I know that our churches see the fact that young families are leaving to go to community churches as a reason to make huge changes in our traditions. Have you noticed the rise in TV advertising for Christian churches?  Did you see Lou Holtz, former football coach at Notre Dame, calling Roman Catholics back to their church, during the BCS Championship game?  Some of this advertising is directed toward the people we call Seekers, but here is my question: If we are brutally honest, would we admit that the size and strength of our congregation or our fellowship or our denomination is our primary means of measuring the growth of the Kingdom and that we see the growth of other Christian expressions as competition?  And, secondly, if there is any truth in the previous statement, is responding to that threat of competitive rivalry replacing our commission to seek and save the Lost?

4.    Bargaining Power of the Customer (Buyer): The ability of the customer to put the firm under pressure or change its marketplace behavior. “The church’s products are perceived as being standard or undifferentiated, switching costs are low, and buyers pose a credible threat of backward integration or for creating their own substitutes for the values offered by religious organizations” (Caferky 21). A for-profit firm can alter buyer power by attempting to lock buyers into an agreement, by differentiating the product and/or buyer selection. On the surface, this force seems to be an overlap with the previous ones. Very subtly, however, it gets to an issue with which many of our churches are struggling: who is really in control of the church?  Are churches “customer” driven, are they “leader” driven, or are they “divinely” driven?  And to what degree are these different drivers congruent/divergent with/from each other?  Customer-driven churches are seen as market-driven, which is sometimes understood as both good and bad.  Leader-driven churches are seen as hierarchical at best and dictatorial at worst, and divinely-driven churches are perceived as everything from other-worldly to mystical to cultish to fundamental. The current marketplace seems to favor customer-driven churches, but my question is: are customer-driven churches in danger of no longer preaching a message that produces “new creations,” that is, where the “old man” is put off, replaced by the “new man?”  Porter’s framework would argue that the more susceptible our churches are to “buyer power,” the less likely they are to “succeed.”   I don’t think we really believe that.

5.    Bargaining Power of the Supplier: The ability of those who supply the firm with essentials to influence its behavior. Cafferky argues well that for churches, these “suppliers” are “charismatic celebrity visionaries, religiously affiliated institutions of higher education, professional associations, denominational leaders, congregational members, organizational founders and, even secular influentials in the wider culture” (23).  Where any of these forces are stronger than the firm itself, he argues, the firm’s strategy/behavior will be under pressure to yield in ways that tend to make it less successful. Because this is so similar in principle to the previous force, I don’t see the need to expand further. Perhaps the real question is what is motivating your church? When you discuss changes—or no changes—among yourselves, from where do your evidences come? Do they come from your “consumers” or from your “suppliers”? And to what degree?  Is your church completely dominated and driven by outside market forces?

There are no answers in Porter’s Five Forces for Analysis; there are only questions to raise? Porter has suggested only a framework for analyzing and evaluating. However, the analysis should lead to conclusions about the way your church “does business.”

Sometimes putting a picture into a new frame really helps us see the picture differently enough to truly re-evaluate. I’ve tried to raise a few of the questions about how we do church, really just to stimulate your thinking.

I’d love to hear your questions or your conclusions.  Seeking first the kingdom of God is where our hearts are, and our prayer is for wisdom.

Read Full Post »

Top 10 Posts of 2012: 8 -13 Reasons Church Leaders Cannot Recognize That Their Church Is Dying!

Posted in Church Leadership, tagged , , on January 2, 2013| Leave a Comment »

Years ago, I was a church leader in an ill church, and I really didn’t even know it! Certainly I had my concerns about different issues and challenges that we were facing, and I threw my influence as far as it would go to help enliven the church, but never did I think that the church might be in a death spiral!

Now, many years later, I ask myself why I did not recognize the very obvious signs of terminal decline. As I have searched my own soul, the following seem to me to be some of the reasons why church leaders do not even sniff the rottenness that is corrupting the Body!

1.     Too inexperienced. Few of our church leaders are trained church leaders. They are usually excellent volunteers, but how many would let an excellent hospital volunteer examine and diagnose you?  What if they couldn’t tell a mole from melanoma?

2. Too busy leading the church! The more rapid the decline, the more work there is for those trying to keep it alive! Hard to see imminent danger because of all the people needing your immediate attention.

3.     Too optimistic! Optimism–trust in God’s victory—is a highly desirable quality, but look at how difficult it was for Jesus to convince His closest disciples that He was going to die! Facing reality is also highly desirable.

4.     Too invested! Your family is in this church; your life-long friends are in this church; you grew up in this church! Unfortunately, none of these investments will save a declining church!

5.     Too satisfied. You have a great group! The building is paid for. Sure, you are a little smaller, but it is still alive for you!

6.     Too comfortable. It takes a lot of time and energy to change things. It is MUCH easier to just keep on doing what we have always done—and maybe it will work out!

7.     Too fearful. You can’t even go to the idea that this church might go away—too much pain involved!  Too many unanswerable questions about the unknown future.

8.     Too proud. After all, you are one of the leaders and things don’t fail that you are a part of! Not on your watch!

9.     Too tradition-bound. We’ve always done things this way and we’ve had rough days in the past, so if we just keep on course and not mess with the formula, we’ll be OK!

10.   Too much ownership! Granddaddy was an elder, Dad was an elder, and now I’m an elder. This is my church and my family’s church, and we will never let it fail!

11.    Too influenced by others. We’ve talked it over at the elders’ meeting, and the consensus is that  we are OK.  The members aren’t complaining.

12.    Too short-sighted. Even if it were true, what can anyone do about it. Might as well just ride to the end of the road.

13.    Too power-oriented. I’m one of the leaders. I can’t imagine not being a leader, so I think I’ll just keep on being a leader!

Rarely is leadership blindness the result of just one of the above Such lists are always an oversimplification of complex bundles of ideas and emotions, but no item on the list above allows church leaders to see clearly the plan of God for the people entrusted into their care.

I’ll end by just challenging church leaders to search their hearts and look for symptoms of reality blindness.  It’s not a fatal disease. Leaders can discover their vision and wisdom in time to take responsible action.

“If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt.”   James 1:5-6

Read Full Post »

The Keurig Generation vs. Church Leaders

Posted in Church Leadership, Other, tagged , , , on June 7, 2012| 3 Comments »

Last evening, I went to one of our regular restaurants to pick up supper and take it home.  I had to ask for the menu, even though we have eaten there dozens of times over the last decade, and I thought to myself: shouldn’t I know the menu by now?

But the fact is that the menu has changed several times over the last ten years. I don’t mean just a new item or two replacing something that no one ever ate; rather, I’m talking about new menus that mean you can’t even remember what the old menu was anymore!

The latest iteration, however, was not about new items, but about combinations of items. For just $20 you can have your choice of appetizers from a pre-selected list, plus any two entrées, again from a selected list. That’s the combination package that I chose, but there were other groupings as well. Lots of choices!

Have you walked down the cereal aisle lately at the grocery store? And it is a whole aisle—because there are so many different brands and kinds of breakfast cereal. I’m a Cheerios person myself, but now I have to choose between original, Honey Nut, Multi Grain, Apple Cinnamon, Banana Nut, Chocolate, Dulce de Leche, Multi Grain Peanut Butter, Cinnamon Burst, Frosted, Fruity, Oat Cluster Crunch, and Yogurt Burst Cheerios.

Choices—lots of choices—are inherent in the mentality of our culture.  It wasn’t always so.  I remember when we only had three TV channels, not hundreds, and  most people drove either a Chevrolet or Ford.

The Keurig Brewing System is a great example of how we function today.  Keurig advertises its machines as “single cup” brewers of coffee, tea, and other hot drinks.  From what I can gather, Keurig offers about a dozen different versions of its machines from which to choose, both residential and commercial, as well as over 250 different flavors of beverages.

So instead of making a pot of coffee which you drink out of your favorite mug each morning, you get to walk into the kitchen just barely awake and decide whether you want coffee, tea, or hot chocolate, then decide whether you want a breakfast blend of coffee or a real man’s roast, then decide whether you want an expresso-size or mug-size coffee, then punch a button and all your dreams come true! After that cup,  you decide whether you want another cup—and your decision tree starts all over again.

And people love having all those choices every time they want a cup of coffee! 

Church leaders tend to resist lots of choices.  Many, many choices mean messy organization, messy vision, messy budgets, messy theology.  Church leaders want simple church, single purpose, focused activities, and unified vision.

If you have tension in your church between elders and ministers and/or leaders and members, chances are good that it has to do with those who want choices and those who don’t.

If you are a church leader, think about these things:

  • The Apostle Paul had only seven points of unity in his letter to the Ephesians: One body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God.  If we insist on unity on these points, we have apostolic backing.  If we go beyond this list, we are on our own!
  • This need for lots of choice is a generational difference—and the younger generation always wins because they live longer than you do!  When you are gone, they are going to sing the songs of their choice, meet when they want to, in the groups they like.  If it is not in defiance of Paul’s unities, don’t try to force everyone to eat Original Cheerios just because it is your favorite!
  • Allow yourself to see choices at church as something positive. I bet you don’t just watch network TV anymore—if you watch TV at all. When we got our first “other” channel in the DFW area, they showed the same movie in prime time for three nights in a row. Now you have your choice of around 75 thousand movies on Netflix at any time of the day or night. So many choices allow us to choose good movies now, not just the ones some program director wants us to see.  And that’s good!

Sherrylee’s Grandmother Blackman is famous in our family for saying when asked about raising teenagers, “If it’s not a sin, let them do it!”

That’s not bad advice for church leaders.  

Read Full Post »

WWJD: Would Jesus Be A Youth Minister?

Posted in Church Leadership, What Would Jesus Do Series, tagged , , , on March 25, 2012| 7 Comments »

Youth ministers are relatively new among us. I grew up in a pretty large congregation in Fort Worth, and we never had a youth minister. Occasionally, in good churches, the associate minister was assigned to teach the “young people” Sunday evenings before Sunday night services.

Glenn Owen, probably right out of ACU, had come to our congregation because we were going to support him as part of the now-famous Brazil mission team which was scheduled to leave in a year or two.  He taught us the missionary journeys of Paul, pretty standard fare for “young people” in those days, but especially meaningful because he was preparing for his own missionary journey.  Glenn went on to be a great missionary, elder, preacher, and finally, the voice of the Herald of Truth all over the world. He was certainly one of my first heroes of faith.

Youth ministers now have their own degree programs at Christian colleges, their own conferences, and their own social media presence.  But they don’t seem to be held in high regard. Let me tell you why I say this:

  • Youth ministry is seen as entry-level ministry position in most churches and is compensated as such.  Rarely are youth ministers part of the church leadership as a result.
  • Youth ministers receive the most sarcastic remarks on Twitter—usually from other ministers.
  • One prominent blogger/minister in our fellowship recently announced a series written by guest youth ministers—but it is anonymous, so that youth ministers can be honest about how they are treated by the Christians that hire them!

Would it make a difference if we believed that Jesus was a youth minister?  Do we need to be reminded of the strong language Jesus used in talking about children:

  • Matthew 18:3
    And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven
  • Matthew 19:14
    Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
  • Mark 9:37
    “Whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me does not welcome me but the one who sent me.
  • Matthew 18:6
    “If anyone causes one of these little ones to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.”

So why do these servants tend to be under-valued and under-appreciated in our churches? See if you think some of these might be reasons:

  • Other gifts are more valuable to the kingdom than the gift of ministering to youth! Preaching is more valuable, administration is more valuable, eldering is more valuable . . . . I know they are more valuable because they are paid more and treated better.
  • Other ministry positions are not viewed as stepping stones.  Youth ministry is for guys too young to be pulpit preachers.  The good ones might get to move up in a few years to associate positions.
  • Youth ministers are sometimes the least trained person on the staff.  They may or may not have a Bachelors degree in youth ministry, but just by reason of experience, they are often undertrained. Too often they are not married, or just married and no kids, or young marrieds with babies and/or young kids.  All of their knowledge about young people comes from two places:  their own story at home and their school books. Both of those have great value, but you want to put your kids in the hands of a pilot that has just read about flying a plane?

It is no secret that churches are losing more young people than they are retaining!  Only 13 percent of them viewed religion and spirituality as important. And even among those who described themselves as Christian, only 18 percent said their religion was important to them (Taken from Thom Rainer’s book, The Millennials). I wonder if there is a correlation between our appreciation for youth ministry and the number of our children that continue to believe??

Wouldn’t it make sense to use our best, our most gifted, our most experienced to work with the people that we love most in this world? Shouldn’t those going into youth ministry have the best educational  tracks, the best mentoring opportunities to make them the most prepared people for their ministry?

And then, wouldn’t we support them well, so that they can stay with their calling??  Wouldn’t we hire them, hoping they would stay for a whole generation of kids?

Jesus said, “See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven” (Matthew 18:10).  If angels are God’s ministering spirits and the angels of children are always in His presence, then He must really care about the ministry to them!

Jesus was definitely a youth minister!

 

Read Full Post »

Can Paid Ministers Have Close Friends? Part 2

Posted in Church Leadership, tagged , , , on February 22, 2012| 2 Comments »

Yesterday, I described my doubts about our business/corporate organizational model for churches, where elders act as owners/directors, ministers/staff are employees, and church members are either customers or unpaid volunteers.

Today I want to flesh out the statement that our churches would be better served and our ministers would not live without loving friendships if we used a family model for church instead of a corporate model?

What would a family model for church look like—especially focusing specifically on money and relationships?

  • In our family, all of the money belongs to everyone. Mom and Dad have more to say than the young kids about how it is spent, but everyone has a degree of input and control. And as the kids mature, they have more input, more control. The assumption is that all of the funds are used for the good of the whole. Who earns it, who spends it, who needs it–none of these factors has anything to do with who belongs to the family and how valued (loved) each member of the family is.  Nothing at all!
  • We are family because God brought us all together, not by our own choice and not because of how we perform. No one is in danger of being “fired” because of their failures or lack of productivity.  Everyone is accountable, however, and everyone is subject to rebuke and correction.  Mom corrects Dad, Dad corrects Mom, parents correct kids—and there even comes a time when mature kids correct Mom and Dad! Sure, tragic situations might force the family to exercise “tough love”—but only for the good of the one being disciplined.
  • A family problem is “our” problem, not “your” problem. A son’s dishonesty is our problem; Mom’s depression is our problem; a daughter’s need for college tuition when money is scarce is a family problem. Problems are resolved together. A family is the safest place to resolve problems because each person in the family is loved unconditionally!  Nothing can separate us from those we love the most!
  • Dad is the head of the house, but that doesn’t mean he dictates everything. For instance, a good Mom (Proverbs 31) may manage the financial household:

14 She is like the merchant ships, 
   bringing her food from afar. 
15 She gets up while it is still night; 
   she provides food for her family 
   and portions for her female servants. 
16 She considers a field and buys it; 
   out of her earnings she plants a vineyard. 
17 She sets about her work vigorously; 
   her arms are strong for her tasks. 
18 She sees that her trading is profitable, 
   and her lamp does not go out at night. 
19 In her hand she holds the distaff 
   and grasps the spindle with her fingers. 
20 She opens her arms to the poor 
   and extends her hands to the needy.

And, besides, the elders/pastors are not the head of the church; Christ is the head of the church . . . and there is only one head!

  • Dad, Mom, and kids each have specific roles to play.  The family relationships work best when Dad does not try to be a kid and when kids are not expected to be breadwinners. It’s better for Mom to be a Mom and not teenage daughter’s best friend.  But these distinctive roles enhance love; the family is dysfunctional if the roles create jealousies or mistrust.
  • Secrets destroy families. Dad’s secret life at work; Mom’s fantasies; kid’s secret addictions! Truth sets us free. Transparency is the sign of a healthy family—even with money.  It’s better that the kid’s know why Dad takes an extra job. It’s better Mom and Dad work out their plan together for getting out of debt. It’s better the teenagers know the family’s general financial condition, so they understand why they can’t …. or they can . . . . Closed door meetings and leadership secrets produce and are the product of distrust. The truth sets us free!

Wouldn’t churches work better using a family model, a model where ministers are family members, not employees? Wouldn’t  a family model work better where elders and ministers and members were brothers and sisters instead of owners, employees, and customers? 

I can’t stop without pointing out that the church is called the “family of God” (1 Thess. 4:10, 1 Peter 2:17) and the “household of God” (Eph. 2:19, 1 Tim. 3:15, 1 Peter 4:17), but never the business or the corporation, not even the organization of God.

Ministers who are family will not be treated like ministers who are employees! Ministers who are family will not be afraid to have close friends in their church—because those friends are their brothers and sisters, not their constituency or their stockholders.

The love of money breaks apart families as well as churches—we all know that. But a healthy family uses money to love each other and to love others, not to control each other and control others.

Churches need to be healthy families!

Read Full Post »

Can Ministers Be Paid and Still Have Close Friends?

Posted in Church Leadership, tagged , , on February 21, 2012| 5 Comments »

Several ministers have responded to my last post “Can A Minister Have Close Friends?” commenting on the difficulties created by being a paid minister for a church. In general, their comments run something like, “When people think of you as their employee, it is hard for either one of you to be close friends!”  Or they say, “When people think they are paying you to do what they don’t have time or desire to do, they are generally not in a position to be a friend.”

Let’s think together about why these ministers feel this way.  See if you agree with these statements:

  • The “power” of an employer to hire or fire a minister makes close friendship almost impossible.
  • The “class distinction” between the ministers who are hired and the members who do the hiring makes a close friendship of equals almost impossible.
  • The financial dependency on the congregants to approve of a minister and his/her work never allows the minister to be authentic enough to form truly close friendships.
  • The common notion that a minister should be financially sacrificial, but the leaders and/or the members are free for unrestrained financial gain creates a tension that precludes true friendship.
  • The requirement in many churches of semi- or fully public disclosure of the minister’s salary creates both jealousies from those with less and/or condescension from those with more rather than close friendships.

Certainly there are exceptions, but isn’t there enough truth in every one of these statements to demand that we pause and reconsider why our churches are entrenched in a financial system that creates deep inequities, social liabilities, and fosters anything but a spirit of love?

I continue to believe that using a business/corporate organizational model —whether intentionally or by cultural default—is highly detrimental to our churches.  I’m talking about the elders being either the owners or the board of directors, the ministers/staff being the employees, and the congregation usually being the customers, with some exceptional churches seeing the members as unpaid volunteers.

Just limiting ourselves to the question of finances and friendships, I believe our churches would be better served and our ministers would not live without loving friendships if we used a family model for church instead of a corporate model?

Tomorrow we will look at the differences between a corporate model for church and a familial model. 

Read Full Post »

Can Ministers Have Close Friends?

Posted in Church Leadership, tagged , , on February 20, 2012| 4 Comments »

Sherrylee’s parents were in ministry all fifty years that they were married. When her mother died, her father remarried a woman who had been married to a minister, now deceased.  Sherrylee’s family was the center of the church’s attention; she would tell you that as a young child she felt like the princess of the church—and I’m sure she was.

But Sherrylee knew which deacon was beating his wife, which elder had children in trouble; she did not grow up ignorant of the hypocrisy and facades in her churches—but she grew up loving the church—because it loved her and her family.

When I met Sherrylee and started visiting her family in Fort Walton Beach, Florida—I know, tough place to go to visit your girlfriend!—I remember clearly an early conversation about her family’s friends.  She told me how well-loved her parents were at all the churches where they had worked, but that her parents did not believe it possible to really have close friends and do their ministry well.  In fact, that seemed to be the common wisdom at the time for all ministers.

Being a young campus minister at the time and with firm plans for mission work, I listened to what my future in-laws said about a life in ministry—and it frightened me a little bit to think of a life without close friends.

Over forty years of ministry later, I understand where the idea came from that ministers could not have close friends.  We’ve had our own share of disappointment with people who were our closest friends.  Our closest friends from our early years in Germany divorced and gave up big chunks of faith. Several of our closest friends in Oklahoma would certainly not call us close friends any more. We have not been sheltered from some of the severest pains between friends in ministry.

But ministers still need friends! And families in ministries still need friends—close friends!

Sherrylee and I have now been in Fort Worth for almost eleven years. We are part of a great church, have been in three good small groups, had our own Bible class for a couple of years—as you can see, plenty of opportunity to make new friends!

Our closest friends, however, have come from our LST family—from ministry! We just spent a weekend in Nashville with some of our closest friends.  Some are former students that did LST with us twenty—even thirty–years ago. Some of these friends are members of our home church who have done LST now for 10-15 years.  Some of these people we have known for less than ten years, but who have invested themselves so heavily in LST that we have seen them several times a year at LST events , and sometimes have even traveled with them.

Yesterday, we had a meeting of our board of directors. Those directors who serve with us fit into this special group of closest friends in our lives. A CPA, a lawyer, a professor, a minister, and a retired journalist are currently on the board. Other close friends have retired from the board in the past few years.

With all of the inherent turbulence that may surround board meetings—hard questions regarding finances, church issues, staff personalities, loyalty to the mission and vision—with all of these pitfalls–serving together and ministering to one another create bonds of love like no other.

So my conclusion is this and my advice is the same for ministers: Don’t be afraid to make friends.  Sure you are vulnerable and people can easily hurt you!  Nevertheless, keep giving yourself away! But don’t be surprised if you find your closest friends coming from among those with whom you share ministry most closely!

If you are without close friends in your ministry, check these things:

  • Are you sharing your ministry or only leading your ministry?
  • Do you care about the people who share your ministry—or only about the ministry itself?
  • Are you being a friend first or are you a minister first? (Tricky question!)
  • Are you afraid of having close friends?

God never thought it was good for man to be alone! Jesus had his friends and his closer friends. Paul surrounded himself with fellow servants.

You need close friends! You will find them among those who will serve beside you! 

Read Full Post »

Tear Down Those Walls and Put In Windows and Doors!

Posted in Christian Missions, Church Leadership, tagged , , , on January 19, 2012| Leave a Comment »

Apparently I got so excited about blowing up silos that I forgot to address adequately two of the main areas for avoiding silos, that is, transparency and distribution of information. 

Real-life silos exist because different kinds of grains need to be stored and they need to be stored separately.  So the best functioning silos offer secure and appropriate storage to conserve the grains, and they isolate their grain and protect it from contact with any other grain.

Mission committees (or any other committee or subgroup) which protect, conserve, isolate, and/or separate are dangerous to the health of the church!  I hope that message has come through loudly and clearly in all of posts.

Let me offer you some suggestions for opening up your committee or your processes to avoid dangerous isolation.

  • Diversify your committee. I’ve already mentioned the possibility of establishing a rotating pattern of leadership in committees, so that no single person sits in first chair forever. Terms for committee members is also something to think about. The reason most committees don’t like new members is that they bring in new ideas. The reason committees need to add new members is for new  ideas!
  • Include members who will sync you with the whole church. You want to make sure that the mission committee’s goals and actions are in sync with the whole church, so why not invite one of the vision casters to be a part of the group. This might be an elder, a minister, or a member of a special committee.
  • Announce both your meetings and the agenda for the meetings publicly.  I understand that occasionally some delicate matters might need to be discussed privately, but 98% of all the committee meetings I have ever been in were not those kinds of meetings.  Why should they not be open meetings?  (I would challenge elders with the same question!)
  • Provide the most public platforms possible for your missionaries when they are with you! I know there was a time when missionaries reported by showing thousands of slides—but unless you are 55+, you don’t remember those days!  Most missionaries are barely acknowledged publicly in our churches, both when they are there and when they aren’t.  Sherrylee and I were sponsored by a very good church and supported by several other good churches—but even when we were in the states, if we did not ask for a meeting with the elders, if we did not fit the regular schedule of the mission committee, or if we were only able to visit a certain church on a non-church meeting day, then we would not even get a chance to talk to those directly involved with us, much less the other members of that congregation.
  • Publish both the goals of your committee as well as how you are working to meet those goals. At least yearly, the whole church should be included in your committee’s work through published information that they can study or refer back to later.
  • Encourage members to participate in the work at your mission sites! Short-term missions give members firsthand experience with the missions of the congregation.  Especially elders and ministers need that personal experience if they are to participate at home in promoting  missions as part of the vision of the church.

Keeping the members ignorant is a way of controlling them. Silo committees are afraid of new ideas and transparency.  Your mission committee needs to be as open, as transparent, as receptive to input, and as cooperative with all areas of the church as is possible for you!

 

Read Full Post »

Blowing Up Silos In The Church!

Posted in Christian Missions, Church Leadership, tagged , , , on January 18, 2012| Leave a Comment »

Blowing up silos is dangerous work! Relationships are threatened, church revenues may be threatened, and serious discontentment among certain subgroups of a congregation may result.  Let’s talk about ways to get rid of silos and try to avoid stepping on any landmines.

If you as a church leader see silos, if you as a member see silos, what can be done?

  • Decide if the fallout is worth it or not. I once heard about a deacon who would not give up the keys to the sound board at church—because he ran the sound board. That was his kingdom.  So is this little kingdom here worth the destruction that comes from blowing it up?  Good question! And there is no single right answer. In this particular case, the worship minister could not practice and the praise team could not rehearse unless it was convenient for this deacon with the keys to the sound board. So, very concretely, the effective worship of the entire congregation was held hostage by the sound board deacon.  The damage to the whole church was greater than the damage of losing this one family, so he was forced to give the keys up! 
  • Don’t destroy without having something better to replace it with.  I know of one congregation where one brother has been in charge of foreign missions for decades! He has done a very good job and served the church well, but his vision has not grown with the congregation, so now he is sometimes out of step with the whole church—but he doesn’t know it.  When someone has enough courage to tell him to give up control, there certainly needs to be a plan and people in place that will serve the church better than the good brother alone was doing! Blowing up silos is not the conclusion of the matter, just the means to a better end.
  • Know the difference between a battle and a war. Leading a rebellion against the elders because you can’t understand why they meet privately and you believe them to have silo mentality might succeed in forcing them out, but the damage done could destroy the whole congregation.  Breaking up the foreign mission committee because they refuse to give up their kingdom  might cost the church a family or two, but probably will not destroy the congregation—especially if there is something better to replace it with.  Destroying the congregation is losing the war; losing a couple of families is painful, but probably only losing a battle.
  • Address the challenges holistically, rather than particularly. Instead of announcing that the foreign missions committee is ruining the whole church because they dominate the church budgeting process, perhaps stepping back and looking at the whole budgeting process and addressing its inadequacies would be more productive.  Instead of painting a bull’s eye on one silo, why not look at the vision of the church as a whole and ask all subgroups to define themselves within that vision. Those that resist or have a hard time will be addressed by all those groups who define themselves or successfully re-defined themselves within the vision of the whole church. 
  • Take a long-term view.  So you think the long-term chair of the missions committee has too much control and not enough accountability. It is reasonable to think that it will not be a quick fix! You are going to have to be patient, working for peace as well as change. God is longsuffering, not willing any should perish but that all chairmen should come to repentance.  You can be longsuffering and patient as well.
  • Relieve fears. We said some people can’t give up control because they are afraid of what they will lose, for instance, like prestige, control, respect, and relationships.  Try alleviating some of those fears as part of the process. Honor people for what they have done. Assure them of relationships and respect. Celebrate the change in status, rather than the demise of the little king.
  • Act in love. If you sense hard feelings or disrespect in yourself towards that person or that subgroup, stop and examine your own heart before you do one more thing.
  • Don’t be afraid.

Christians are called to be peacemakers, so I do believe in living at peace with all people as much as it depends on me. I do know, though, that little kings and little queens of church territories are sitting on little thrones that don’t belong to them and that diminish the ability of the church to function fully and gloriously as the family of God or the body of Christ.

We must never allow other thrones inside the church than the throne of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords! 

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »