Toolbox For Faith

I received an email last week from a friend about potential factors involved in dealing with reduced giving in a congregation. As I thought about the situation, these five points came to mind.

1. Attendance - if attendance is trending down, that may explain part of the problem. People who don’t attend, typically don’t give - unless you have an automated giving system in place.

2. Increased Giving offset by Missing Families - Individuals may already have increased their giving, but that increase may be offset by families who have left or reduced giving. If you don’t see an increase in giving in response to a direct appeal, it doesn’t mean that people don’t want to respond, it may simply reflect the fact that the people who are present are already giving at their highest level, but it isn’t enough to offset what is lost. A detailed analysis of giving patterns could help bring clarity to this question.

3. The “If you want to see a change in the congregation, feel free to make two changes in yourself first.” Principle - Often people are more willing to make a change if they see change already happening around them. A clear announcement of an increase in giving by leadership combined with a small spending cut or a new source of funding, could encourage other people to act as well. Simply announcing we need to make a change probably won’t be enough.

4. Increased ministry = increased giving. Increased shepherding = increased giving. Often the best way to increase giving is not to send a letter, but to celebrate the ministry being done and to increase the amount of shepherding (caring/visits/conversations) taking place in the congregation. If I found myself in a congregation with a declining giving pattern, I would celebrate a “ministry success” loudly and then start making my way around to visit folks (in person or by phone) and simple ask how they were doing. I wouldn’t ask about money, just life. This is a long-term solution, not a quick fix.

5. How often are you saying “Thank You”? If you aren’t doing so already, I’d start sending (at least) quarterly giving statements with a thank you note in each one. Again, don’t ask for money, simply report what has been given, say “Thank You” and connect that gift to a ministry taking place within the congregation. This too is a long-term solution, not a quick fix.

The headline, “IPhone confession app gets church approval,” intrigued me even though I do not have an IPhone. The article explained that the app approved by the Roman Catholic Church had a custom examination of conscience based on your age, gender and marital status as well as a confessional walk thru including a place for people to add their custom sins. All of this for only a cost of $1.99.

For a person who pushes “O” constantly while listening to pleasant recorded messages giving me every option but talking to a real person when I call most businesses, the app reminded me how impersonal our society has become. Just this week I was reading about the high school football star who chose a different college than his mother wanted him to attend so he texted her the news and didn’t tell her in person or even by a call because he knew she wouldn’t approve. He took the easy way out which is what apps, texting and email can become.

I sincerely hope the IPhone confession app helps some people realize that they have moved away from God but I am convinced that our Christian faith is best demonstrated when we share it in person—when we can laugh together, cry together, talk together and support each other. I know the world is changing but our personal witness is still the central starting point in the midst of all the transformations happening in the world. That is something I never want to forget. Apps and modern media can help but they can never replace each of us personally sharing the faith.

And just so you know, pushing “O” constantly usually get me to a real person much quicker than waiting for it to be a last resort.

In an article entitled, “Film School” Chris Anderson proposes that the rate of change in society is being accelerated by the ability of millions of people to view and respond to online videos. In the past, an idea may have been limited to a small circle of people, but now millions of people with differing resources, perspectives and experiences can witness, analyze and improve upon the idea. Anderson believes that innovation has always been a group activity. He says “most innovation is the result of long hours, building on the input of others. Ideas spawn from earlier ideas, bouncing from person to person and being reshaped as the go . . . . Throughout history, the best creativity has happened when groups of artist, reformers, writers, or scientists connected regularly with one another.” Anderson refers to this process as Crowd Accelerated Innovation.

Crowd Accelerated Innovation, Anderson points out, is not new, and certainly we can see its impact in the history of the Christian movement. Look at how the disciples solved the problem of the widows who weren’t getting fed or the work produced the the various early church Councils or the impact of the group of people surrounding Luther during the Reformation. Throughout Christian history we have seen numerous examples of the crowd - the body of Christ - developing new and powerful ways to go and make disciples of all nations.

In today’s world, Christianity faces a number of challenges, problems and opportunities. I know there are wonderfully talented people in various corners of the church working in these areas, but it seems to me that the best way forward for the Christian movement is to tap into the variety of gifts which make up the body of Christ - to take advantage of the “crowd” God has gathered together and allow the body to innovate, problem solve and lead. Crowd Accelerated Faithfulness lacks the control that top-down solutions might offer, but think of what we might accomplish if we use the resources which exist in today’s world to connect huge segments of the body of Christ and invite them to work together to build up the whole community. Moving in this direction will require leaders to relinquish a certain amount of control, will require us to embrace new and emerging technologies and may require us to modify the way we have always done things, but to me the potential of Crowd Accelerated Faithfulness is simply too powerful to ignore.

I had the opportunity a few weeks ago to participate in a webinar presented by The City with Reggie McNeal, author of books like The Present Future: Six Tough Questions for the Church. The webinar was entitled, “Changing the Scorecard for Church.” I was extremely impressed by what Reggie had to say. He emphasized the need to be a misssional church, the need to be faced outward in mission and his belief that we need to stop measuring program participation and start measuring the impact our ministry is making.

Here are my notes of a couple of the questions that were asked and his answers.

If historically we have been church centric, what are the shifts in thinking in the local church that need to take place to be a missional church?

1st Shift - move from internal thinking to external thinking. For example, how much of the spending plan is consumed by “putting on Sunday worship.” Congregations need to begin to believe that our core activity is to be turned outside - to bless the community. Our call is to bless everyone who is not part of us - to bless the rest of the world.

2nd Shift - move from a program driven model to a people development agenda. (Most difficult in his opinion) We have been very good at manufacturing programs. Pastors have been good at producing sermons. The metrics by which we measure our progress and success are tied to program participation. If we switch to a people development agenda, then we begin to ask questions like “How are the people?” “How are their lives growing and improving?”, instead of asking how many people showed up for the program. McNeal says several times that he is not against programs, he is more interested in what the point is - what the goal is than what the program is.

3rd Shift - move from church centric program leaders to leaders of a movement. Requires a shift to a community orientation. We have been really good at inside the building stuff, but in today’s world we need to because missional leaders in the community, not simply in our congregations.

Changing the scorecard. How do you decide what to measure and how do your measure it?

The metric needs to grow out of the soil where you are planted, the context and what you believe God is calling you to do. Work your metrics backwards from the results you are trying to achieve. You may not be able to measure the long-term outcome, but you can figure out how to measure progress and engagement.

Many years ago at a workshop, Lyle Schaller suggested a question that I have found invaluable over the years. He said always ask, “What year is it?’ when analyzing why certain actions occur in a parish. That question has helped me enormously in understanding the congregations I have served and it have been central in planning a strategy for that congregation to grow forward in faith and service.

When I have thought of this question at the congregations where my wife, Cheryl, and I have been worshipping over the past weeks, the results are puzzling. The congregations appear to have asked the question “What year is it?” in mission outreach but have stopped there. All of the congregations have looked at their communities today and appear to have a wonderful understanding of needed 2010 outreach into their communities. But in most other areas, they have taught me that they are using ideas that haven’t been useful since our society was a church culture in the 1950’s and 1960’s.

I am still attempting to figure out why this has happened—that only the mission outreach is 2010 and so much of the remainder of the congregational life is lost in the past. Perhaps it is due to the current recession that has caused so much change in the lives of many, many people but I am not sure. Please let me know if you have any brilliant or even semi-brilliant explanations.

According to Ruby K. Payne in her book “A Framework for Understanding Poverty,” there are three basic classes in America - poverty, middle class and wealthy. Each “individual brings with him/her the hidden rules of the class in which he/she was raised. Even though the income of the individual may rise significantly, many of the patters of thought, social interaction, cognitive strategies, etc., remain with the individual.” (pg. 3) Knowledge, or lack of knowledge, of these hidden rules helps identify someone as a part of a group. Payne illustrates these hidden rules using three checklists that assess your ability to survive in poverty, survive in middle class and survive in wealth. Here are samples from each list:
“I know where the free medical clinics are.” - Poverty checklist (pg. 38)
“I repair items in my house almost immediately when they break - or know a repair service and call it.” - Middle class checklist(pg. 39)
“I support or buy the work of a particular artist.” - Wealth checklist (pg. 40)

Payne sums up her discussion of the hidden rules by saying, “The key point is that hidden rules govern so much of our immediate assessment of an individual and his/her capabilities. These are often the factors that keep an individual from moving upward in a career — or even getting the position in the first place” (pg. 44).

As I read Payne’s work, I began to wonder what role these hidden class rules play in congregational hospitality. Do wealthy or middle class congregations understand how to properly welcome people in poverty? Many congregations provide assistance to people in poverty. I know our congregation, for example, interacts with several hundred people in poverty per year. Of all those people we meet, however, almost none become a part of the worshiping community. Even when I feel like we have made a solid connection with people we are helping, they still don’t seem comfortable in the community. Could it be that everything from style of worship to the attire of the congregation to the focus of the preaching is so grounded in the middle class rules, that people from poverty quickly and perhaps even subconsciously determine that they are out of place? The issue could also arise for a middle class family who visits a wealthy congregation. When it comes to hospitality, perhaps the question we should be asking is ‘Does our church exhibit the clear characteristics of a particular social class?’ and ‘Is it possible to create an environment that welcomes and includes people of all classes into a congregation?’

I read an interesting article this week entitled, “Think Visual” by Clive Thompson. Drawing on the work of an author named Dan Roam, Thompson argues that “our culture relies too heavily on words.” He believes that “dynamic, complicated problems . . . often can’t be boiled down to simple narratives. They’re systems; they have many little parts affecting one another. In those situations, drawing a picture can clarify what’s going on.”

In the church, we do words well. We have scripture. We have tradition. We have liturgies. We have prayer. We have lots and lots of words, so it shouldn’t be surprising that when faced with a problem we often try and talk our way to a solution. I was a part of a conversation last weekend where we discussed an organizational vision. One of the documents we were using had only words and one of them had a picture which incorporated the same ideas and fewer words. Guess which document was referenced again and again and which one was mostly ignored even though the concepts were virtually the same. Increasingly we live in a visual world and perhaps sketching out the problems we face may inspire us to see new connections and discover new solutions.

Last Monday, I posted a link to an article from the Columbia Partnership on the Death of the Middle Judicatories. This week, the author, Dick Hamm, has posted a second article suggesting a way for middle judicatories to live and behave that he believes is healthier and more effective. His suggestions make a great deal of since to me and invite us to explore a new way of being God’s people together. You can read the article, the Resurrection of Middle Judicatories here.

After reading my last post on our vacation church-going experience, two people asked the same question—what can we do at our church to make sure that we are a welcoming congregation. I have three starting points you can consider.

First, change the culture of welcoming by doing an exercise at the beginning of the service that we have been calling “100 seconds of Fun” at the church where I was interim. After I welcomed everyone, I asked the congregation to move about for 100 seconds welcoming as many people as possible. We chose 100 seconds in honor of the 100th Anniversary of the congregation. Two weeks ago, a guest told me on the way out that our congregation was the friendliest she had ever attended.

Second, change the culture of welcoming by using your church’s governing body to be a greeting force. Take the group into the sanctuary and tell them to sit where they normally sit and then have them divide the congregation into areas in which they will be responsible for welcoming everyone in that area and introducing the guests to as many people as possible.

Third, change the culture of welcoming by having an Art Lee type person at the door who welcomes everyone and finds out information about the guests. Art was a member at one of my congregations who took the responsibility of being in the narthex before and after services. He gave me the names of all guests when I exited at the end of the service and then talked to each guest when they came out, introducing them to all around. Art was a natural who shared a warm welcome that became contagious and spread.

Try one, two or three and see if they can help change the culture of welcoming at your congregation.

I carry my iPhone with me everywhere. I use it to check email, read the news, keep up with my daily tasks, keep my contact list, send texts and occasionally make phone calls. I’ve had my phone for about eight months now, so I am still fairly new to the smart-phone world, but I can already see how it is changing the way that I communicate and undertake ministry. In a previous time, I checked email occasionally while I was in the office. These days, I check email constantly and exchange messages with people in the congregation throughout the day. In a previous time, I would stay around the office waiting for people to call. These days, I have a growing number of church folks who send me texts to ask quick questions or update me with messages like, “Mom’s out of surgery.” In a previous time, I went back to my office to access ministry resources. These days, I have used my phone to look up hospital information for a family and to find directions to make a visit. In just eight months, my iPhone has become a tool I depend on to accomplish ministry on a daily basis.

As I think about these changes in myself and the way that I do ministry, I have started to wonder if congregations are adapting quickly enough to changes in communication. For example, should the church have a cell phone so we can send and receive text messages from the church to our youth? As people become accustomed to receiving a constant flow of information, what does it look like for a congregation to shift from a large monthly newsletter to a system which provides ministry news in small digestible bits through multiple streams? As everyone transitions away from having one home phone number to having their own personal phone number that they carry with them constantly, how will we respect the privacy of staff and congregants? In general, I guess it all boils down to this - how will we adapt to the possibilities these new communication tools provide and the expectations that they create?