Today I am switching places with Thom Rainer. He was supposed to be preaching in chapel at Southeastern Seminary today, but we switched about ten days ago due to some scheduling conflicts. So, if you were coming to chapel to hear Thom Rainer today you will be greatly disappointed.

In the spirit of switching places, check out the program from this year's Christian Book Association / International Christian Retail Show (CBA/ICRS) in Denver. As you can see (below), I am no longer President of LifeWay Research but am now, according to the ICRS program, president of LifeWay. I am very excited about the promotion.

Oh, there will be new policies, fellow LifeWay employees. Many new policies. And many others will be deleted. I'm currently considering 4 day weekends, and lunches catered by PF Chang's. Please stay tuned.

I just came across the National Congregation Study Wave II via the Christian Post and it's definitely worth noting. This study, directed by Mark Chaves, Professor of Sociology, Religion, and Divinity at Duke University, compared over 1,505 congregations in 2006-2007 with 1,234 in 1998 revealing some noteworthy changes American churches have experienced in the last 10 years. Here a few points worth thinking about.

Style
The study shows that our American churches have become less formal in worship style over the past 10 years. "More worship services include drums, jumping and shouting or dancing, raising hands in praise, calling out "amen," visual projection equipment, applause, and speaking by people other than leaders compared to 1998, the National Congregations Study shows."

These stylistic changes have not robbed or replaced the biblical components of worship. The Christian Post summarizes, "But the numbers for some features have remained about the same, including a sermon... singing, greeting time, silent prayer or meditation, reading or reciting Scripture." So worship tends to still include preaching, praying and singing while our churches adapt to a very interactive and tech-driven culture.

Tech
I've blogged on the issue of tech in the church on several occasions (here for example), and while we should always be intentional and careful when adopting new practices, as pointed out above much of what this study revealed was the embrace of tech culture-- not the abandonment of biblical components of worship.

In 1998, the number of congregations with Web sites was only 17 percent. The number has since risen to 44 percent in 2006-07. In other words, since 1998 another 10,000 congregations created Web sites and now 74 percent of service attendees are in congregations with Web sites.

Meanwhile, the number of those using email to communicate with members increased from 21 percent to 59 percent during this time period. Nearly 80 percent of attendees as of 2006-07 are in congregations that communicate with members via email.

While it's hard to imagine church life in 2009 without websites and electronic communication, 10 years ago it simply wasn't an issue.

Ethnic Diversity
Simply put, our churches are more ethnically diverse today than they were even 10 years ago. More specifically, "the diversity occurred mostly among white churches; the majority of black churches still remain predominantly racially homogeneous."

Age of Leadership
Yet while cultural diversity becomes more of a reality in our churches (a very good thing), leadership in American churches appears to be aging. With all the talk about younger leaders and church planters this is not what some would expect.

The median age of the head clergy has increased from 49 in 1998 to 53 in 2006. Furthermore, congregations across the religious spectrum have fewer younger leaders. Today, only 39 percent of congregations are led by someone 50 years old or younger, a drop from 48 percent in 1998.

Size of Congregation
Also worth noting, in the midst of all this change, is that the median congregation is the same size today as it was in 1998 (75 participants). Additionally, "the median person still attends a congregation that is the same size as it was in 1998 (400 regular participants)."

This study is broad, including all kinds of congregations. You can find more information at the Christian Post's article, or you can go directly to the study at Duke University.

I've spent some time with Mark and consider him a solid researcher and I believe the research is well done and helpful.

Today we are electing a new president of our country, and while most seem to agree that change is needed, what that change should look like is hotly debated. I hope everyone gets out today and plays a part in this choosing our nation's leader. I believe it is civic duty and Christian responsibility.

Make no mistake, this election is different than previous elections for a number of reasons. One worth noting is that self-identified "born again" voters are split on which candidate will get their vote. Geogre Barna reports that,

...among born again voters there is a statistical dead-heat: 45% plan to vote for Sen. McCain, while 43% expect to cast a ballot for Sen. Obama. Even if Sen. McCain were to sweep the 10% who are undecided born again voters, he would fail to reach the 62% who rallied for President Bush in 2004.

Barna's research is careful to distinguish between "evangelical, born again Christians" and "non-evangelical, born again Christians," but things are changing even within the more conservative group (evangelical, born again). For example, in 2004 85% of these voters selected George Bush. But when Barna's research came out two weeks ago only 63% of the evangelical group said they are supporting the Republican candidate.

Most of the experts seem to believe Senator Obama will win this election, though it may turn out to be a closer race than many expect, and people of faith are playing a prominent role in all of this. Barna explains,

If the presidential election were held only among born again Americans, it would be a close contest. When the rest of the nation's voters are factored into the equation, Sen. Obama is staked to a commanding lead among likely voters, 50% to 37%. In large part this lead is due to the substantial support he receives among other self-identified Christians, that is, individuals who describe themselves as Christians but who are not categorized as born again. Among this group, 54% plan to vote for Sen. Obama, compared with 33% for Sen. McCain. This voting segment represents 36% of likely voters. (source)

So how are Christians to respond?

Well, I recently read a letter from a Methodist pastor posted at Ben Witherington's site. I found these two paragraphs helpful and insightful:

There is always - always! - a "contrarian" bent to the Christian political angle. After all, in the Roman empire the complaint filed against Christians was "they are turning the world upside down" (Acts 17). In a world that does not love the Lord Jesus, we will expect to find ourselves at odds with business as usual; we shun a judgmental spirit, but we do not refrain from making judgments. "The Church is not simply a 'voluntary association' that may be of some use to the wider public, but rather is the community constituted by practices by which all other politics are to be judged" (Stanley Hauerwas).

Abraham Lincoln told the truth about "sides" who boast of God: "Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; each invokes His aid against the other. The prayers of both could not be answered... The Almighty has His own purposes." Knowing this, we treat each other charitably, and look to God for something better: "With malice toward none; with charity for all... to bind up the nation's wounds - to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations."

We're about to choose a new leader for ourselves, and, regardless of who wins, some American Christians will be frustrated and disheartened. This is a difficult election for many Christians, but it should not-- it cannot-- eclipse our mission. And while politics and presidents can connect to the outworking of our faith, God uses the preaching of the gospel in word and deed to bring redemption to the broken, forgiveness to the sinful, hope to the lost and the real "change we need." It is not an elected official who will transform the country, but the grace of God at work in his church-- that is what changes lives, transforms cultures and turns cities upside down.

November 4th will come and go, but our mission remains the same, and our hope remains secure. That's change we can believe in.

Yesterday, I received an email from Alan Nelson, telling me about some changes in his role. Alan is moving to California and moving from full-time editor to part-time Executive Editor of Rev! Magazine. He will be doing more speaking and writing now and you can find out more about him at www.alanenelson.com.

Anyway, all that to say that it reminded me of a recent article I published with the magazine, I think it was in the last issue. If you are a subscriber, you have already read the article. But, if not, let me share it below.

The theme of the article is change. This has been a "change" week for me. I am right now at Ridgecrest, NC where I have been teaching on the subject for the last few days. And, I just started reading Who Stole My Church, which is, so far, and excellent fictional parable of a church struggling with change.

When Mike Dodson and I wrote Comeback Churches, we did so to help churches change to reach their community. And, yes, it requires change. You cannot do the same thing and expect different results. However, Alan Nelson at Rev! challenged us with the question: how do you motivate people to make that change. The result is the article below:

I have attended the SBC each year since I started working for the convention in 1998. Being reared nominally Roman Catholic just outside New York City, I am not the normal attendee or the normal Southern Baptist.

Prior to 1998, as a church planter in the northeastern US, I could not afford to come and felt like an SBC outsider most days. When I started teaching at Southern Seminary, I started attending. As a (former) contemporary church pastor, I felt much like an alien would feel when landing on a new planet. I heard some of the preachers speaking against contemporary churches, stating that sitting on stools when you preach is wrong, and not meeting on Sunday nights meant you didn't love Jesus enough. I was not just an alien, it sounded like I was an unwelcome alien. I was half scared and half angry. But, in just a decade, things have changed dramatically.

For example, I talked with Hayes Wicker in Inianapolis and we discussed pastor's conferences of old. He reminded me how he spoke with every speaker for the 2007 Pastor's Conference to be sure there would have no "drive-bys" on fellow SBC pastors. I am so glad he did such a thing -- but I also wish it was not needed. And, I believe it will be less needed in the years to come.

This year, we did not hear swipes at Rick Warren, Calvinists, the emerging church, or contemporary music. Instead, we heard Jimmy Draper tell us we were in "free fall," Johnny Hunt said we were dying, and Al Gilbert pointed to our need for appropriate change. The real dangers we face and our real hope became very clear. It was a very different year for us.

Let me give some of my feedback on the meeting this year.

The Spirit of the Meeting

I was surprised at the sweet spirit of the meeting. It appears that the reality of the our denominational trends has caused Southern Baptists to pause and reflect rather than fuss and fight. It started at the Pastors' Conference when Johnny Hunt spoke that he had never been a part of anything that was dying and was not about to start now. Jay Strack and others added to the call. Al Gilbert explained that the "doctor's diagnosis" must stir us toward change. And, with many other preachers, words were received with hearts ready to charge forward.

The Baptist Press article title of Gilbert's sermon may be a good summary of this year's convention: "Death check' could stir SBC toward renewal." Indeed.

I have said before and will say it again here: "People never change until the pain of staying the same grows greater than the pain of change. I think the pain of staying the same is getting to become a reality and now people are saying 'We're going to change." That tipping point has arrived. And I observe that our leadership and convention are calling for change to occur. I outlined some of my thoughts here as to what I believe are some priorities for us moving forward.

It should encourage all of us that when the alarm bell sounded that the response has been overwhelmingly for a Great Commission Resurgence. I am encouraged that we are responding to the call that the nation and world's population is in eternal jeopardy and we can be in the midst of God's plan of redemption. Such a call is what gave birth to and united our Convention 163 years ago.

When we're not seeing people come to Christ and being baptized, something stirs in our hearts and it hurts. A tone like that gives me hope.

Newly elected SBC president Johnny M. Hunt believes this year's annual meeting has helped our churches to see things as they really are. "I think this is kind of an alarmed setting ... where we see our ship sinking. We're declining," Hunt said. But at the point of decline, more Southern Baptists are expressing optimism and sense the denomination stepping up to face the challenge. I came away encouraged by what I heard in Indy and even how it was covered by the press.

I believe that we are ready to continue in the doctrine outlined by our Baptist Faith & Message. I believe that Article XIV is of particular importance these days. It speaks of our cooperation with one another and others with whom we can work in "loyalty to Christ and His Word as revealed in the New Testament." A decade ago, there seemed to be unwritten rules of who could have a say. With the help of men like Jimmy Draper, Frank Page, and many others, our convention will enjoy a wider representation in our leadership. Where a decade ago, it seemed that anyone different was suspect - now we are seeing people reach out and involve people more broadly.

Who won?

I think Southern Baptists won. Though the meeting was disturbingly small and many young leaders were absent, there was something else that was absent: anger and petty fighting. And let's face it - many were expecting a 3-ring circus with so many running for president. But, we behaved ourselves, worked through the process and have returned home unscathed.

Johnny Hunt won the presidency. But, he won, I believe, because he called for a focus on the nations, the next generation, and on unity.

Some will hail Hunt's win as the continuation of our current leadership's dedication to raising the next generation of church leaders and "white hot" evangelism. Others will cry foul and say we are blindly trusting in "megachurchism" as the answer to all our ills. I would observe that FBC Woodstock is big for a reason - its pastor loves to teach his people to share Christ by being excited to share the Gospel every chance he gets. No matter whom you voted for this week, Johnny won and I believe he is willing to lead all of us to be more passionate in our sharing, more vigorous in our planting, and more loving in our service to a lost world.

And, Southern Baptists will win when led in that direction.

What surprised me?

Resolutions
Painfully long statements about what we are for, against, who we want to thank and reject seem to be like our own version of the Olympics each year. Without commenting on any specific resolutions, I would simply say that I am pleasantly surprised to know that we are moving away from the need to be tell everyone what we think about everything.

Let me also add that I am very pleased that the resolution on regenerate church membership passed. I am a bit perplexed as to why this was even controversial, but I am glad we passed it. Now, we just have to live it.

Desire for More Methodological Diversity

So many I spoke with desire to reach out to churches of different ministry paradigms. That is good news. Now, my only hope is that it is not too late.

Actually, that is not right. It is too late for many. We have preached out a whole generation of contemporary church pastors and they won't return. However, there is hope to connect with some who are still open and willing. My time with Troy Gramling, pastor of Flamingo Road Church (with over 7,000 in attendance each week) encouraged me that such is possible. And the scores of men planting culturally relevant churches (contemporary, urban, emerging, etc.) and many more seeking to revitalize plateaued churches give me hope for a future of biblically sound and missiologically diverse SBC congregations in North America. We will always be a convention of primarily traditional churches, and I am so thankful for them, but I am encouraged that there may be room at the table for other biblically faithful expressions of church and ministry.

The Future

David Dockery, who did a great job preaching at the SBC, has identified 7 streams of Southern Baptists. Trevin Wax listed the seven types as:

• Fundamentalists: hard-lined people who often have more in common with "independent" Baptists than with the SBC heritage.
• Revivalists: true heirs of the Sandy Creek tradition, including their suspicion of education.
• Traditionalists: heirs of the Sandy Creek theology, including the strong commitment to evangelism and revivalism, but affirming of education.
• Orthodox Evangelicals: an irenic group that looked to Carl F. H. Henry and Billy Graham as models. This group wanted a theological course correction, a commitment to the full truthfulness of the Bible, serious intellectual and cultural engagement, while interacting with all who would claim to great orthodox Christian tradition.
• Calvinists: a group that wanted to reclaim aspects of the "Charleston" theological tradition. They have much in common with the "Evangelical" group above. Sub-groups include "Nine Marks," "Sovereign Grace," "Founders," and others. Most among this group no longer tend toward isolation as in years past.
• Contemporary church practitioners: a group of pastors who wanted to find new ways to connect with the culture, resulting in new models for doing church, including "Willow Creek Models," "Saddleback Models," "Missional," and even some "emergent church types."
• Culture Warriors: another group of conservatives who desire to engage the issues of culture and society. This group includes a variety of approaches including "church over culture," "church transforming culture," as well as "church and culture / social justice types."

Within this spectrum, some say we are unalterably headed toward oblivion and others want to say we are just fine. I would reiterate that without change, our course over the last 50 years does not look positive. I pray that our future will be filled with a continued tone of gospel-focused, biblically sound, properly relevant, missional engagement both here and abroad so that all facets of our tribe can fulfill our ambassadorial role for Christ. Through the challenging days of the Conservative Resurgence, we came to agree in the inerrancy of scripture. Now we should rely fully in its sufficiency for a Great Commission Resurgence.

When someone wins, many people assume that someone else lost. But I believe that logic does not hold in a denominational context. Some say the "establishment" lost. Others say it won.

However, even the term "the establishment" is an odd one and no longer particularly useful. Am I the establishment because I release the denominational statistics? What about seminary presidents, state execs, mega-church pastors. I would say that there is no longer correct to say "the establishment." And, that may be difficult for those who want to be THE establishment.

So, I don't think it helpful to trumpet who won and who lost. Instead, I think we talk about the future. And, that is a future we need to head into together.

I hope we can all see the importance of all of these groups "singing" together in the choir of leadership rather than demanding the need to be the soloist. If only three of Dockery's seven are allowed to sing, the music will continue to dim. I, for one, would like to see a robust choir singing of God's plan for the nations. That is what our "one sacred hope" should be about-- conservative Southern Baptists cooperating across tertiary differences because we can reach the nations better together than we can apart.

I am not naive on the issue of cooperation. Some will say, "let's just cooperate and not worry about theology." Five years ago I wrote my first nationally published article to disagree with that notion. In it I asked, "Can We Do Missions Without Doing Doctrine?" And, the answer, was "no."

Today, I would ask the same, but also add, "Can we do missions now the have agreed on our doctrine?" In last year's SBC sermon I said:

[I]f we have to agree on everything, our mission will amount to nothing. Wasn't the promise of the conservative resurgence that we would get to the point that we agree on enough that we can now reach the world for Christ? When will that come? I'm ready. Are you?

It felt that this year the SBC said, "Yes, we're ready."

Conclusion

What do we do now? I guess each person would have their own desire so let me give my own opinion. What I want is no different from what I said preaching at last year's SBC:
You can read the SBCLife version here, the full version, and watch a video snippet here, but let me close with these words (excerpted from the SBCLife version):

Luke records [in Acts 16], After he had seen the vision, we immediately made efforts to set out for Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to evangelize them. Could we leave this Convention with a passion for mission? Could we leave this Convention with a vision for the people of our community? After we hear the cry, "Come over and help us," can we cry out like Isaiah, "Here I am, Lord, send me"?

God help us that we might be focused on His mission for His purposes, and that His name and His fame might become more widely known.

Feel free to post in the comment section. However, I will be out on vacation for the next week and won't be able to respond.

---------------

More resources:

Hear Al Mohler and I discuss the decline here.

Other analysis and commentary from my seminary (SEBTS):

• Danny Akin


• Nathan Finn