In what I am sure was a clerical error, the folks at Duke Divinity recently asked me to respond to some questions about the state of the church and some other issues. I have deleted the Duke-specific part and am posting the rest here.
Questions on the Church and Seminaries
I. Church (Relate your answer to (1) congregations, (2) associations and regions, and (3) the denomination.)
1. What is your sense of the health of the Church?
First, I would say "health of the churches." ;-)
I would say that it is hard to answer that because the churches are so different. Mainline denominations are no longer bleeding--they are hemorrhaging. Increasingly, they are simply managing their decline, not reaching out to others.
For evangelicals, the picture is better, but that is only by comparison to the great decline of the mainline churches. Southern Baptists have peaked and trends indicate they will decline over the next several decades. The same can be said of many evangelical denominations, though the recent ARIS study indicated that there was actually an increase in self-evangelicals (coupled with a decrease of self-identified Christians).
Only two Christian denominations (out of the top 25) are growing: the Assemblies of God and the Church of God (Cleveland, TN). (The Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses were also in the top 25 and growing, but I would consider them "other faiths" and not Christian denominations.)
So, Pentecostalism is doing OK. Evangelicalism is flat but showing signs of a cracking foundation. The mainline is dying.
2. What are your greatest worries about the Church?
I will list several for the congregation.
1. The loss of focus on the gospel.
Much of the current church scene has become an exercise in moralism without an appeal to gospel transformation. This is true in traditional church settings (which teach what you should NOT do) and contemporary church setting (which give you five things you SHOULD do). The difficulty is that neither focus on the live shaped transformed and shaped by the gospel.
2. A lack of discipleship.
I doubt I need to list the studies (including Reveal by Willow, The Shape of Faith to Come but LifeWay Research, and others) that indicate discipleship is in rough shape. If the churches fail to produce robust disciples, we will continue to lose the next generation to nominalism and will fail to engaging people without Christ who will find out lives (and thus our faith) unappealing at best, and hypocritical at worst.
3. The danger of cultural captivity.
I am one who thinks that the church has to look similar to the world and live different. That is not the pattern we see. Today, many churches look more like a past era than a transforming gospel. Thus, I think that churches need to engage their cultures through their service, actions, forms, and approaches. If not, they become obscure the gospel to a world that believes being a Christian means changing your music, your clothes, and your political party affiliation, rather than being changed by the work of Christ on the cross.
II. Ministry (Clergy)
1. What role do clergy/ministerial leadership contribute to either the health or sickness of the church?
It depends on the pastor, I would think.
Most pastors tend to see their role as that of a caretaker. Most people want to be cared for. Thus, the church continues as a dispenser of religious goods and services with the clergy acting as spiritual shopkeeper--caring for needs while distributing religious services. The end result is a disempowered laity and a co-dependent pastor.
But, there are also many bright spots where pastors have empowered, trained, and sent out men and women into mission and ministry.
2. How do seminaries form clergy/ministers to be effective and faithful church leaders?
Again, it depends on the school, I would think.
Most seminaries don't do what most incoming church-bound seminarians think they are going to do--prepare them to be pastors. Seminaries tend not to be particularly good at making leaders who lead churches. Since seminaries tend to be staffed by scholars, who are generally not strong congregational leaders, they provide scholarship and not leadership. This is fine--but not what most church-bound leaders are expecting.
However, I am not one who thinks that graduate education should be a checklist of ministerial functions wrapped up in course numbers: "How to Preach" 2432, "How to Lead" 8544, etc.
I think that effective seminaries will partner with churches that provide hands-on modeling and mentoring to form church leaders, while the classroom is helping to foster and biblically-shaped and theologically-driven ministry outlook. However, in my own teaching experience, I have seen few that actually do this.
Let me know if you think I am off, right-on, or crazy in the comments below.
Posted on April 21, 2009 at 8:31 AM ~ 27 Comments
Tagged with: church, research
Thank you Ed for taking the time to answer these questions and post them here. They are spot-on. Grace and peace to you.
I think you are on especially as it relates to ministry bound, wide eyed, passionate take the world for Jesus seminarians who leave so academic that the church they are leading becomes another classroom.
Discipleship is academics in the context of relationship. Unfortunately we have made discipleship academics in the context of a classroom.
"1. The loss of focus on the gospel. "
I agree, but would add that most churches are now social clubs, where activities and staying "protected" in the Christian bubble is most desirable for members.
"2. A lack of discipleship."
In the past 8 years I've seen numerous studies that show that within 18 months of graduating high school, most (Currently 88% for SBC churches) young adults who were raised in the church stop going.
I'm curious, when pastors are presented with this information, have you seen any do anything about it? Out of concern, I've interviewed many of the youth pastors in my area, and the results are bad - most are fearful of losing their jobs if they stray from the seeker-sensitive pizza, pop, and topical preaching that they've used for so long. As a result, teenagers know several bible stories, but dont' really know why they believe what they believe (and often don't know what they believe anymore).
(I'd really like to hear your opinion on this.)
This, I think, leads the cause for "3. The danger of cultural captivity."
My observation is youth groups are currently training kids to be kids, not adults; and Sunday school isn't working. Likewise, parents should be raising their kids spiritually, not expecting the church to do it all for them.
"II. Ministry (Clergy)"
1: I can see where you're coming from, and mostly agree. The runner up I've seen is the clergy/layman divide. Especially in larger churches, the leadership creates a wall at the pulpit, where layman stay in the seats, expecting to be fed while leaders are expected to preach and do the work of the ministry by themselves (contrary to Ephesians 4:11-13).
2: As for seminaries - I completely agree. Professors should help with theology while local pastors help mentor them for service.
You are so right about the seminaries, Ed. My local colleagues discuss this point often. When will the seminaries see the light of day?
Right on!
I agree largely with your comments.
Related to the Congregation: Some of what you express is said in Kimball's book "they like Jesus, but not the church", but from more of an "outside looking in" perspective. We must address people as they are with the Gospel, but we also must show how the Gospel changes lives, not just eternities. I feel the struggle in my context to enourage people in holy living and yet not teach moralism. Baptist seem to typically be "against" certain things. I see more value in being "for" certain things. I think this is why there is such a draw to guys like Piper and Driscoll among younger pastors.
Related to seminary: I graduated from Southern Baptist Seminary in 2005. As a result of my time there, I prospered intellectually and devotionally. However, what equipped me for pastoring was working with Scott Davis at Cedar Creek Church during my time at school. I strongly believe that only the church can prepare a pastor. Seminaries are para-church, and have their place, much like Campus Crusade or Navigators. There is great value in the organizations, but they are not the church. God uses the church to make disciples, not the seminaries.
Perhaps some disconnected thoughts, but I wanted to interact with what you are saying. Thanks for your work, I regularly find it helpful.
Right on. Ouch.
I agree with all your comments. I have spent most of my adult life helping pastors start and build churches. It is a vicious cycle. To build a church, you need vast sums of money and vast numbers of volunteers to keep programs going. The types of people who provide that money and volunteers are seeking a staff who tells them "5 steps to being a successful ...." or "5 things to not do" or "5 theological exegeses on ___". The three groups of people find a church where the pastor preaches on one of those three topics. It is actually relatively easy to start a church in America, pick one of the three models, find a pastor who has great oratory skills, raise great sums of money, and build a large staff and building to support the crowds it takes to keep it going.
To fix the problem, we must break the dependency on money and large numbers of volunteers. We must find models which do not require large buildings, staff, and programs. That will allow the church to return to a gospel of Christ.
Patrick,
Regarding what churches are doing to stem the tide of young people falling away after graduation, a few years ago the church I attend did their own survey and saw that we were pretty close to the national rate of 80-85% attrition after high school. They totally revamped the youth program.
With a large church, comes a large student ministry. Two youth services on Wednesday night (Jr and Sr high). with 250+ kids, it's impractical for the student pastor to effectively minister to every teen one-on-one. So the lead pastor and youth pastors set up a "class pastor" program.
Each graduating class (class of 2009, 2010, etc.) has a man-woman team of class pastors (often a married couple) assigned to them from the time they enter middle school in the 6th grade, all the way until one year after graduating high school. These class pastors stay in these kids' lives for 8 years as mentors and coaches. They teach that class' Sunday school, they make contact with the kids outside of church, and each class has their own periodic outings and activities apart from the "whole youth group" outings.
In 9th grade, for several weeks the Sunday school class is devoted to basic doctrine. What we believe, with the Bible basis for it. Almost a Pentecostal version of a catechism class.
Every year, each month has a theme focus (personal relationship with Jesus, maintaining sexual purity, serving others, time with God daily, understanding Biblical truth, making wise decisions, growing healthy relationships to name a few). These 12 realities are dealt with every year (with different sermons each year, of course) so that by the time a student graduates, he or she will have had repeated instruction in the essentials of the Christian life. And they will have a long-term relationship with a mentor who has walked beside them through these difficult formative years.
Only about 3 classes have graduated so far under this program, and those just had 2-3 years in it, but I'm anxious to see the long-term results of this more longitudinal discipleship model.
i think you're spot on. i do think seminaries need to keep a high academic level, though, and might argue that the SBC seminaries need to be tougher and more rigorous academically. i can say that MBTS i had a good mixture of pastoral and academic coursework, and that all my professors tried to keep a finger on the pulse of the church.
I would say that not all mainline churches are hemorrhaging, my Anglican church is growing, specifically in the college area. And from what I understand the Anglican church is continuing to grow in America, especially among college age Christians. The college ministry we started in August with 5 people now has 45 people on a Wednesday night and we grow almost every week, that's just in 8 months. While some mainline churches are dying out, I think we will see a resurgence in mainline/liturgical traditions as younger Christians seek more traditional ways to worship and seek out conservative theology.
I think people at Duke Divinity School would be sympathetic to almost everything you say except "I am one who thinks that the church has to look similar to the world and live different." Because most of the folks here are coming from mainline traditions (United Methodist predominantly with some Episcopal, PCUSA, Lutheran and Baptist), there is a desire to make use of the liturgical resources within those traditions for "discipleship." They have been burned by "look similar to the world and live different" in liberalism--in the process of "looking similar to the world" the "living differently" has gotten lost. Thus, they have the conviction that if we celebrate the Lord's Supper regularly and try to understand it, we have a better chance of "living differently" as opposed to say watching one's preacher on a video screen.
One other issue I think that is worth noting with Duke Divinity School folks is the different understandings of leadership within the free church tradition (entrepreneurial, creative, evangelistic) vs. those in the mainline tradition (care for one's parish until one is moved to a new area). The ability to exercise leadership is limited when you are (like most United Methodist pastors) moved every few years by the bishop.
People should check out Duke Divinity School's new Faith & Leadership website. http://www.faithandleadership.duke.edu/
I have also suggested a variety of other resources which people should access for church leadership help (if they are part of the mainline) in my review of Bill Hybels's book Axiom (which I knew many here at Duke would not find useful because it is so far removed from their setting).
http://www.andyrowell.net/andy_rowell/2009/03/how-to-read-hybels-book-review-of-axiom-by-bill-hybels.html
BINGO! You hit the nail squarely on its' little round head. Thanks for posting.
Thanks for the assessment. I do not believe the local church has demonstrated the ability to develop the "Priesthood Belivership; but continues to make cultral transformed members who like to think it is the leadership's role. We need to continue to become like Paul's message to the Church. It is all about the Gospel!
Brian,
Good insights. Thanks.
Dwight,
I am glad to hear it. I am not sure where to put the Anglican groups that have left the mainline Episcopal churches. But, as a whole, the mainline is hemorrhaging.
Ed,
You are exactly right on a need for a partnership between churches and seminaries. Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary is partnering with local churches to do exaclty what you are advocating. We have churches with pastors who are pouring their lives into our students while they are in seminary. Thus, the student gets training from the church (which emphasizes the practical side of training) and the seminary (which emphasizes the academic side of training).
Ed, unfortunately I think you nailed it. None of us like bad news but I think we all need to be confronted with truth. Like you, I have the privilege of working in some incredible churches that are alive and well. But I also connect with some who are simply "doing Church."
As a United Methodist, I'm happy to seek Duke stepping out of the echo chamber and asking you these questions. It's certainly time for Christian leaders to band together across denominational lines and work to reach the people of our culture for Christ.
The seminary that you describe...one that is closely connected and integrated with the local church is the new Seminary that they are starting at Indiana Wesleyan University. I was reading just yesterday about its approach to partnering with the churches and developing church leaders...I was pretty impressed! http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/IWU.seminary.htm
1. Informed leadership--as difficult to define percisely as it is ("Leadership is . . . what worked . . . to influence people to . . . do the right thing in the right way . . .")--must be infused? (Less platform, more hallway/sidewalk/restaurant, leadership)
2. Education--real teaching and learning, not just talking and listening--must be implemented? (Talking--and preaching--is NOT teaching; listening is NOT learning; seniority is NOT at all a guarantee of effectiveness or efficiency--or ethical behavior)
3. Real straight talk ("So, are you a born-again Christian or are you not? What good thing will you NOT do now for the Lord Jesus Christ, considering the fact that He let Himself be hammered onto a cross for your sins AND you profess to have been saved/transformed by Him?") must take place on person-to-person levels? (The called evangelists among us doing what only they do best; everybody understanding that to have our spiritual health restored to us by God means one thing: getting back on-mission with Him for world redemption--anything else means revival hasn't happened yet)
4. Good models of effective evangelistic ministry (i.e. Saddleback? Podunk Holler? etc.) must be considered for application/adaptation? (Fewer meetings ABOUT evangelism, more evangelism--done intentionally, relationally, relevantly)
5. Ordinary integration, motivation, adaptation, and goal-achievement of social systems such as churches? (Four problems each social system--of whatever size--must deal well with everyday in order to see a brighter tomorrow)
Wade,
You have correctly described what I think will work. It does not mean that the seminary has to, for example, meet at a church facility. But, the seminary should serve the church and find ways to connect with her.
And, one of the reasons I am on the faculty at Southeastern is becuase I see that the leadership there knows it exists for the church!
Andrew,
I have taught at Indiana Wesleyan. Good folks.
Ed
Unfortunately, I would have to agree with your comments. Lutherans have fallen into the idea that pastoral office is to be a good manager of church affairs ,biblical scholar, and care taker of spiritual duties. It is not looked at as a leader, equipper, model, mentor, or shepherd. There is some change but very slow. This is the reason I took an alternate route to my seminary education. One other reason is IS WE CAN'T EXPECT SEMINARY TO DO EVERYTHING FOR OUR SPIRITUAL AND PROFESSIONAL FORMATION. PASTORS NEED TO BE MOTIVATED LEARNERS AND INVEST IN THEIR NEEDED FORMATION. THE SEM. CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH JUST LIKE THE CHURCH CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH. As Christians we need to have a greater ownership in our development and not blame the sem for what we don't have. I would blame myself for not seeking out other opportunities.
In an age of role confusion the Pastor needs to clearly define his role in the life of the church. His role, his actions, and vision will shape the church. A pastor can become the CEO of a church or a good employee. This is perhaps why Jesus' metaphor of a Shepherd is so significant because it involves all the aspects needed for Pastors i.e. leading, discipleship, modeling, mentoring, gathering, sending, etc.
I would say we use Jesus at our model to evaluate where we are and were we are not in our role as Pastor for our development and the staffing around us.
Ed,
Great post, especially concerning question number two.
Living and ministering in a "frontline" area like urban South Florida provides great insight to the answers you gave. I would agree the thing that is lacking most in many churches is the lack of focus on teaching the Bible. People are starving for the truth, yet so many churches shy away from teaching the full counsel of God.
This lack of biblical focus contributes to a lack of discipleship. If the preaching is "gospel lite", then the small group/discipleship teaching will usually not be very strong either.
This leads me to a question. Even when committed to doing discipleship, the culture of "me first" makes it very difficult to get people to give us the time necessary for discipleship. How do we structure our discipleship/convince people that the time they are giving for discipleship is really an investment for their spiritual growth?
Thanks for the great blog.
My highly intelligent comment is to say I think it's pretty snazzy you used a smiley in an answer to Duke Divinity. ;-)
Ed,
The Mainline is NOT hemorrhaging.
That is much too generous...
We are dead. There are only so many folks like Adam Hamilton, Michael Foss, Dawn Darwin Weaks and John Ortberg (PCUSA baby!) to go around. The DNA of our communion is dead. We have some healthy churches, but we are a dead communion.
May God bring back life to that which will give it's life away for the Gospel and the Gospel alone.
Sarah, it was an informal survey. And, in my tradition, we think more of local churches than "the church."
So, I could not resist.
Geoffrey, I do see some places where there is life, but I wish there were more.
You talked about every thing which has been so good and encouraging.My quetion is how do you think of a church, praying under a tree,and is calling on you to help build a structure for people to be under shelter?