I did an interview this morning with a national secular magazine about the efficacy of "door-to-door outreach" and will link to the story as soon as it's available. Much of what I shared came from some research we did at the Center for Missional Research on whether or not door-to-door is an effective tool.
Here is what we published last year:
Every Saturday morning at First Church, dedicated church members meet to do something both their parents and grandparents did before them--door-to-door visitation. They visit people in the neighborhood who might be new church prospects with the hope they'll begin personal relationships with Christ either that morning or the next Sunday at church. Recently there has been a growing debate among those assembling for outreach as to how to approach their task. Some on the team want to share the gospel with every person they come in contact with--or they believe they're putting the person's eternal destiny at risk. Others suggest that the team should simply invite people to hear their biblically faithful, gospel-preaching pastor tell them about Jesus during his Sunday message.
Who's right?We (the North American Mission Board's Center for Missional Research) decided to find out. By partnering with a polling firm1 to ask 1,200 random Americans we discovered that the answer just might be--"both."
When you knock on a stranger's door, more people are open to a church invitation than a gospel presentation--but a significant minority are open to both. According to the survey, Americans are far more open to people coming to their door with that simple invitation than trying to tell them how to get into heaven (53 to 35%). The only exception to this trend is among African Americans, nearly half of whom are okay with someone coming to their door with an evangelistic message--15 percent more than any other ethnic group surveyed.
These stats tell an important story--many people are open to an invitation to your church and some are open to hearing about heaven. Even 40 percent of the most unchurched are open to an invitation to your church, which is something that the whole church can do-- something that's much less scary for the typical believer and takes less training. It is helpful to know that many people are open to a church event invitation where, perhaps, they can hear the gospel in an understandable way. Imagine how many more houses your church group could visit if every person could be convinced to make one visit and one simple invitation.
Many people, including me, were surprised that the negative reaction was not more pronounced. But, the numbers are here and, surprisingly, more people are open than we think--particularly if they are approached in a respectful manner.This survey also contradicts the long-held belief that young people would outright reject church groups coming to their door. In fact, despite being known as one of the most difficult to reach demographics in the country, people between the ages of 25 to 34 were virtually just as likely as their next elders (ages 35 to 54) and considerably more likely than the 70+ crowd to appreciate someone coming to the door and inviting them to church.
As you'll see in the chart below, it's only those on the low and high ends of the age spectrum that will generally shun a door-to-door invitation to church more often than not.
Ideological and socio-economic factors also play a part in how open people are to door- to-door church invitations. More than two-thirds of those who call themselves conservative would likely listen to your church invitation, should you come to the door. But churches in "blue states" should take note--only a little more than half of self-described liberals would do so.
In fact, as you put together different components of the research, you begin to see a clear picture of the type of community where door-to-door church invitations could be most successful. If you were picking such a place, you'd probably settle on a poor to working class community that's ideologically conservative with a high number of Protestants. All three of these demographic groups recorded higher than average openness to church invitations through the door-to-door method--all were above 60 percent. Conversely, it's not as well received in a liberal, well-to-do or middle class, non-Protestant community.Yet any good news about door-to-door church invitations can only be limited as we look at the study. The fact remains the unchurched are far less interested in being invited to church by someone they don't know knocking on their door. Only 39 percent of those surveyed who attend church rarely, on holidays, or never would be okay with someone coming to their door and inviting them to church, according to the survey. The numbers are consistently worse when asked about "counseling" for "heaven," or what we would call personal witnessing. In other words, the very people we say we want to get into our churches the most are the people least likely to be impacted by one of our favorite outreach strategies.
Now more than ever, we need to look toward new methods to get the unchurched into our churches. Some people will be reached through door-to-door methods. Others will not. While more than half of Americans would listen cordially as a stranger at their door invited them to church, more than 60 percent of the unchurched might tune us out before the invitation left our mouths. Now, the cross is always a stumbling block, but we also want to be sure that our methods are less so.
The message of the gospel is too important to be spread through just one strategy--and if God leads you and your church to a certain strategy, you should use it. Door-to-door methods can be and are used to reach people. At my own church plant, we went door-to- door passing out flyers and free popcorn to invite people to our preview service. This method can still be an important part of our evangelism strategies, but our study shows that not everyone is open to such an approach. Let us ask God to show us additional ways to reach the unchurched--through relationships, service, ministry, and invitations to visit. Remember, God wants to see the unchurched connected to a family of faith even more than we do.
I have attached a PowerPoint presentation covering the same data. You can download it below.
Posted on November 6, 2008 at 9:28 AM ~ 26 Comments
Tagged with: culture, door to door, evangelism, gospel, means, methods, missional, offense
You are welcome (and encouraged) to comment below, but be sure your comment relates to the post. Feel free to discuss the topic, but do not denigrate individuals. Comments are moderated and usually appear within 15 minutes of being posted. Regrettably, Ed cannot personally respond to most comments and questions.
Leave a Comment
26 Comments
11/06/08 @ 12:09 PM
Great info, but I have a question. I serve in a multi-cultural downtown situation. Any ideas about the door to door response across cultures/language groups? What about the response when someone of one ethnic group is knocking on the door of a person from another group? Just curious as I try to make application to my ministry area.
11/06/08 @ 12:16 PM
Ed,
I think the research only underscores the need for believers to be in tune with the Spirit. He (and only He) will help us discern between "run alongside the chariot" and the more relational disciple-people-into-the-kingdom approaches.
Thanks,
Caleb
p.s.- Look at me! I'm commenting on a post from Ed that doesn't mention megachurches!
11/06/08 @ 12:16 PM
It would be interesting to know if there was a difference in response when the invitation was to a church in town vs a church in the neighborhood. People would "possibly" be more likely to respond better to a invitation to a service that is down the street vs. one that is across town. Especially if the church sees its immediate neighborhood as it's primary "mission field"
11/06/08 @ 12:35 PM
Bob and Chris,
Good questions but we did not have enough of a sample here to address those questions.
Caleb,
So glad you are here and NOT talking about megachurches. Grin.
11/06/08 @ 12:36 PM
Ed,
Thanks for sharing this. It is great information that we can really use. Sometimes the "old" ways are still effective. My church doesn't do this, but it has planted a seed in my head.
BTW, you need a bio here on your blog that new people can read to understand your credibility. I'll be pointing some of my church leaders here, and it would add to the authority of your studies and ideas if they knew more about why you are qualified to espouse such things.
Keep up the good work!
Chris Meirose
http://mrclm.blogspot.com
11/06/08 @ 12:41 PM
Would "red states" roughly correspond with "Bible belt"?
Does this work as well in California as it does in Georgia?
11/06/08 @ 12:49 PM
Ed,
Love getting this information. Great stuff. I sent it along to my Pastors and communication team.
11/06/08 @ 12:52 PM
I think it would be interesting to see just how the questions were framed. The first graph says "is it OK if..." That implies "I'll tolerate someone coming to my door," and about half the people aren't even okay with that. Does this make it effective, especially when we see this openness is overwhelmingly church people? Not trying to criticize, just ask questions to figure things out.
11/06/08 @ 1:07 PM
Adam,
No offense taken: wording always impacts answers. We chose these to answer the question as we wanted it asked. But, they were asked "coming to the door" to counsel them about heaven... and they were not as excited then.
Josh, I would think it would be less effective in California.
Ed
11/06/08 @ 1:10 PM
It may be worth noting in this context that the concept of what is "effective" in a ministry of evangelism has more to with obedience to God rather than what is most productive numerically. God may call some to share the Gospel with the non-responsive, and in that case the endeavor would be 100 percent effective even if it doesn't seem "productive" to human eyes. I hope this makes sense - I had to keep it brief because I'm writing from my phone!
11/06/08 @ 1:36 PM
I was interested on your take of the response from blue states. Do you think this is based on a liberal political view or do you think it is based on a regional location. As one who has been doing church planting in Boston for the past four years and has been at seminary at Gordon-Conwell for 1.5 I haven't heard of much response to knocking on doors but I don't think it's tied to liberal political views...it's more a New England thing. We don't want people knocking on our doors unless we know them. Doors are always open to friends and family. Does your research address those sorts of issues?
11/06/08 @ 1:36 PM
Interesting information. My community (around 6,000) has not been very responsive to door to door. The JW's have beaten that path around here as well as our friends in white shirts and ties. So, it is very hard to distinguish us from them in this area.
We have done limited door to door in the past and may use it for passing out flyers, but not a important strategy for us-
Steve
11/06/08 @ 1:43 PM
Nathan,
Seems to me you are on to something there... but we did not look at that in the study.
11/06/08 @ 2:01 PM
I really think this is interesting. I have not read your blog for long but I have been thinking of church planting. The door to door thing is one of those things that seems overwhelming to me, but all the same intriguing.
I live in California and given what has happened here in the elections with Proposition 8 I wonder what the door to door responses of churches would look like today. Lots of mixed emotions out here.
11/06/08 @ 2:50 PM
I like this study. I've been door to door on a weekly basis. I used to be the minister of evangelism at Cornerstone before I become the executive pastor. I had to make 25 visits a week. I would do 15-20 traditional visits to guests in my car. I then would hit 20-30 homes a week on foot. Here's my take away from the experience: "you never know how lost people are until you get out there and see them."
I know 99% of those out there will not mind a respectful knock on the door. I did lead some to the Lord. I did mostly pre-evangelism. But I believe God used it.
No, numbers are not the reason. Or wait, maybe they are. Obedience is not divorced from numbers because numbers are people.
I'm passing this post on Ed.
11/06/08 @ 3:41 PM
Ed,
What would be a "respectful manner?" It is obvious that going to their door and engaging them in dialog is the beginning of this "respectful manner." What else?
11/06/08 @ 5:08 PM
I really like this statement you made.
"Now, the cross is always a stumbling block, but we also want to be sure that our methods are less so."
All too many times, folks look down at numbers, stats, or even trying to improve evangelistic efforts.
Its also cool to look at this geographically, and see the differences. I personally find the Engel scale fascinating as applied to door to door, but the socio-demographic data presented here opens a whole new way to look at things, going well beyond Engles methodology.
11/06/08 @ 7:43 PM
Ed,
Do you have any data on effectiveness, that is, how many people actually show up at church from door-to-door?
I would be interested in seeing some numbers on how many people show up once, or twice, or become regulars, or become members.
In my experience, though I have done a fair amount of door knocking in my neighborhood over the last ten years, we have only had one person actually come from door knocking and he only came a couple of times.
11/06/08 @ 11:00 PM
". . . a poor to working class community that's ideologically conservative . . ." Will be every neighborhood across the entire United States in about 4 years, some say . . .
;~)
11/06/08 @ 11:09 PM
The "evangelism which is need-oriented intentionally," "relationships which are loving practically," and
"ministry which is gift-based consciously" of Natural Church Development?
Until God makes people differently than He has for thousands of years, the local church still has a good chance to reach folks for Christ as it always has: via intentional/relational/relevant approaches lovingly sustained--even at a doorstep.
Thanks for the research news, Ed!
11/06/08 @ 11:27 PM
Our Southern Baptist church partners with 2 local Assembly of God congregations to do servant evangelism every Saturday morning in the neighborhood which most often makes the news in our city (drug and gang activity). So far, few families needing it have declined our offers for lawn-mowing and other such assistance. We walk down the street knocking on the same doors week after week and ask how we can help that day (we even have toilet-cleaning supplies with us in case that's the response!). Our aim is to build relationships which lead to a soul-winning--at least, church-visiting--invitation; sometimes those opportunities come quickly, and others have taken longer.
The families on the street have learned to watch for us on Saturdays. It's been a good thing for our congregations--few, if any, members of which live in the neighborhood any longer. The focus has been a Kingdom one more than a denominational one; the AOG brothers and sisters pray for residents on their porches, asking for the healing which they understand is in the atonement--our members stand beside them asking for healing from the One who did the atoning work!
11/07/08 @ 12:21 AM
Larry,
Great question. The reporter asked the same thing.
The answer is: no one knows.
I am guessing that you can't find many people who were reached ONLY through door-to-door. They probably knew someone, or met someone, along the way. So, it is almost impossible to break that out and look as JUST door-to-door.
David,
Now, now, now... for what it is worth, studies show that the economy has done BETTER under Democrat than Republican presidents.
Ed
11/07/08 @ 4:19 PM
Thanks again for an interesting post.
I wonder what the stats would look like in Australia? My anecdotal is that it is pretty similar to the non-churched end of your data - about 1 in 5 are happy to talk. Only 1 in 20 would be actively negative.
11/07/08 @ 4:23 PM
Ed:
I'm a lover, not a fighter.
;~)
David
11/08/08 @ 9:30 PM
Thanks so much Ed. We are a small church and need this information. You are a blessing to our church!
11/11/08 @ 4:48 AM
Ed,
Thanks for posting this research; it helps to think twice before slamming an evangelism method.
The question was asked about effectiveness in California; I'd ask what about the effectiveness of door-to-door in the Northeast.
My guess is that it would be less effective in the NE.
At what point is the predicted effectiveness reason to ditch a method in favor of something more culturally aligned?
Thanks again for gathering this interesting stat.