~~Church
growth is all the rage. For pastors, the focus is on leadership. For
laymen, on “reaching people.” In the church world, church-growth is the
standard of success. If a church “reaches people,” and the pastor is a
“visionary leader,” then the church will be considered a success. If a
church makes it into somebody’s bogus “Fastest Growing Church” list,
then the growth frenzy continues with the sheep flocking to check out
what innovation has been initiated to reach the masses for Christ.
Personally, I think the Emperor has no clothes.
For at least four reasons, I reject the church-growth and
church-health principles taught at almost every pastor’s conference, and
expressed in almost every church. Our church will be different, because
I reject these principles. Although different will likely mean odd,
behind-the-times, and shrinking in size, I go there anyway.
I refuse to believe that a “Christian community” will save anyone.
Community is the big word today (along with missional…and if you
claim to be a missional community, you are really on the cutting edge).
Churches work hard to design community. They do it through small-groups,
centered around felt-needs, and gathered in living rooms across the
country. These community groups gather for the bigger community in a
weekly celebration of magnificence. This weekly celebration has been
carefully scripted, from the ridiculously silly and manipulative
countdown screen, to the last triumphant note of victory at which the
community members are sent out to create a Christian society by building
community within their neighborhoods.
These community groups gather for “Bible study,” which is almost
always a double misnomer. The only Scripture used will be out-of-context
references that came from the latest book by the latest Hollywood-looks
celebrity pastor who gathered his thoughts (from the internet?), and
allowed a nameless editor to work them into something profitable. The
group will neither study the passages, nor the book itself. They will
simply read a chapter before they come, spend 45 minutes talking about
the parts they liked, share how the chapter made them feel about
themselves as well as any insights gained, then go away and tell their
friends about their marvelous Bible study. It reminds me of when my dad
told me we were having tube steak for dinner. I was somewhat
disappointed when I found out he just used that lofty sounding name to
refer to hot-dogs. Today much of the Bible study in
missional-communities is the equivalent of tube steak.
Following “Bible study,” the groups engage in fellowship time,
then go on their way as biblically empty as when they arrived. Soon they
will gather for a “mission project” in which they repair a home
(painting the door red so all the town will know that this is one of the
homes repaired by that missional community, and will rise up and call
the missional community wonderful). If not a home repair project, it may
be picking up trash for the city, or painting a dilapidated school, or
providing shoes for shoeless children. The sermon will often be aimed
toward raising up an army of Christians who adopt the orphan, visit the
imprisoned, and blog for social justice.
Even if I believed that these “missions projects” were as
successful as the church websites claim (“we had an awesome God-thing
happen at our last gathering”), I don’t think it has any lasting impact.
As I see it, the Christian is not so much to engage his society, but to
come out from it. The church today is filled with those who are both in
the world and of the world, and who are organized to change the world
into a kinder, gentler place to be. The success rate of the mega-church
missional-church movement has been an utter failure. Society is more
liberal and godless than ever before, with no end to its decline in
sight. The mega-missional church will gather in their multi-campus
celebrations this weekend and slobber over themselves for their
victories, yet our society doesn’t display achieve a single victory. Not
one.
Building missional community does nothing more than produce a
feel-good complacency to the community members. Although they live,
assured they are going to be people of impact, as part of a community,
they fail to really make any difference. They fool themselves into
thinking the Emperor’s clothes are superb.
Have you noticed that I’ve not mentioned anything about the
proclamation of the Word, and the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
That’s because there is not much to mention from the church today. The
church today does good works, has good music (in the ears of many), has a
really good sound-system, and a pastor who could lead circles around
Moses. What it doesn’t have is the backbone to proclaim that our world
must reject humanism, social justice, poverty eradication efforts, and
other white-washed measures of “expanding the Kingdom of God”—and, must
find its only hope in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus
Christ.
I reject all manipulation and aim toward persuasion.The
second reason I’m leaving the missional-community church-growth
movement is because I reject manipulation of all kinds. In fact, more
than ever before, it disgusts me. The modern church is so built on
manipulation that I’m convinced it could not continue without it.
I
recently attended a relatively small Bible-believing, Bible-teaching
church as a guest. I was refreshed to see that almost every participant
had their Bible—and opened—during the sermon. This told me that the
pastor regularly delivers enough verse-by-verse content that looking up
one verse on an iPad just wouldn’t suffice. Bibles, for this rare
congregation, were a necessity. I was also impressed by the music. It
was bad…and that impressed me. It wasn’t polished. There wasn’t a
carefully selected Praise Team who passed the “Sunday morning test” of
looks and sound, dressed in color-coordinated clothing, closing their
eyes and looking to heaven as if they were in an ecstatic moment (I’ve
often seen these ecstatic moments turn on and off like a light switch).
In fact, the song leader was clearly not a professional, and his tone
was often off just a bit. But the people sang with joy. I was impressed
with their prayers. They prayed for real and legitimate needs during a
Sunday morning service. It would never pass the church-growth test,
because it wasn’t seeker-friendly at all with random people from the
congregation praying at-will over the needs of the members. As a
first-time visitor, I felt out-of-place during that prayer, and I
thought that was wonderful. After all, if I was looking for a church,
I’d want one that really cared about the hurting people they knew, the
flesh-and-blood people who sat in their pews each Sunday.
Most churches (including mine) are not like this. In most
churches (not mine), I wonder if they would be able to continue the
“worship” if the electricity went out. The service is so dependent on
mood-lighting, electric instrumentation, sound amplification, and video
enhancement that it would fall flat in a New York minute with no power.
In my church, thankfully, if the electricity went out, we would give one
another a quick glance and grin, and keep on singing or preaching. If
the electricity-dependent “worship” of the modern church lost
electricity, we would see quickly how much vast emptiness there is in
these churches, and in short-order, the churches would be vastly empty.
No show, no crowd. (Incidentally, I’m not a fan of the black-box
architecture of the missional-community church. This is a total
rejection of centuries of theologically-driven architectural principles
of church design that understood a theology of aesthetics.)
Rejecting manipulation, I won’t do a countdown video before the
service; it simply enhances the idea of a show that is about to begin. I
refuse to only allow the A-team to “perform.” I don’t want soft music
playing while I pray (or preach, or give an invitation). I don’t want
“smart lights” that set the mood, changeable at the push of a button to
fit the tone of the selected song. I don’t want to manipulate my
audience into a certain feeling which will evoke a certain action. Doing
so is sadly too easy, because our generation (as the Bible predicted)
loves the tickling of ears. If you tickle, they will come.
What I do want to provide is persuasion. I want to stand before the
congregation with a persuasive argument from Scripture. As a lawyer
before the jury, I want to present a water-tight case that will change
the thinking of those who have come to hear a Biblical message. I
realize that I do this in a day in which feeling trumps thinking, and so
my kind of persuasive preaching will often be rejected. Persuasive
preaching doesn’t have enough stories, illustrations, and “you can do
it” back-slapping grunts.
I refuse to let my congregation be deceived by good feelingsThirdly,
I reject the missional-community church-growth movement because it is
deceptive. Participants in these churches feel like they are stalwart
conservatives in a Bible-believing, Gospel-proclaiming, Hell-reducing,
Kingdom-expanding church. They consistently proclaim, “My preacher
really preaches the Bible.” True, their preacher does hold up a Bible
and talk about how true and authoritative it is. He even quotes from the
Bible fairly consistently (“I know the plans I have for you…I will
never leave you nor forsake you…I am come that you might have life more
abundantly…(and, of course) bring ye all the tithes into the
storehouse”). What these church members do not know is that they have
adopted the leftist agenda (socialism) or neo-con agenda (reconstructing
a Christian society) which is as empty as it has always been.
I will lose church-growth potential because I won’t allow a
good-feeling production to trump reality. Do my church members know
their Bible? Can they give a defense of the attacks against it? Can they
rightly divide the Word of Truth? Do they have a Biblical worldview
that understands creation (young-earth), eschatology (pre-trib),
salvation (Jesus as propitiatory sacrifice), grace (free from the Law),
and so much more? Have I developed a congregation that could, and would,
stick with it through a months-long study of the book of Numbers? Or
Leviticus? If I have not developed this kind of Biblical hunger, then
I’ve just allowed them to be deceived by thinking they’ve had Bible
study, experienced worship, and come away a better (and more
Christ-like) person. Since I will stand before God someday to be judged
for reality (not feelings), I will be satisfied to spend my time and
energy developing a Biblically-literate congregation.
I reject the church as a program organization over which I am the CEOFinally,
the CEO model of Pastor has to go. I know that almost every
missional-community church-growth model pastor’s conference says this
same thing, continually reminding pastors that they are not CEOs. Then,
having given the obligatory rejection of CEO style leadership, they tell
the Pastor that he should be known as the “Lead Pastor” (lead…short for
leadership, a key CEO trait). They instruct him in the best means of
vision development and “vision casting.” They Peter Drucker him to
spiritual death. They study the Bible, not looking for Biblical truth,
but looking for leadership traits of Moses (one of the worst leaders of
all time), Gideon (zero leadership capability), Nehemiah (who was not a
priest nor a pastor, but a government official), Jesus (who did nothing
but follow His Father), or Paul (who said pastors should “preach the
Word”).
Going further, these pastor’s conferences (or books) talk about
all the programs and paradigms the church could/should implement to
develop its missional-community. Of course, as soon as you create any
kind of ministry (i.e. program) in the church, it requires some
oversight, which requires the Pastor to leave his pastoral function and
begin acting like the conference/book instructed him to act: like a
leader.
Don’t call me Lead Pastor. Don’t call me Senior Pastor (been
there, done that). Don’t call me Teaching Pastor (is there any other
kind?). Just call me Pastor, and let me devote my life to prayer and the
ministry of the Word, ministering to the flock under my care. I happen
to believe that if a person attends a church where they cannot call the
Pastor and talk to him, they don’t really have a Pastor.
ConclusionI’ve just rejected everything that
has become the favorite methods of the missional-community church,
which it uses as it bows down to its idol called church-growth. I’m sure
some have said “amen” all the way through. If that was you, you’ve
probably struggled to find a place to worship and call your church home.
Others have come to the end with a righteous rage, wondering how I
could so “not get it.” Whichever side you are on, I encourage you to run
to the Bible and use it as your only source of revelation about the
will of God in church, society, and your own personal life.
Dr. Randy White

Church
growth is all the rage. For pastors, the focus is on leadership. For
laymen, on “reaching people.” In the church world, church-growth is the
standard of success. If a church “reaches people,” and the pastor is a
“visionary leader,” then the church will be considered a success. If a
church makes it into somebody’s bogus “Fastest Growing Church” list,
then the growth frenzy continues with the sheep flocking to check out
what innovation has been initiated to reach the masses for Christ.
Personally, I think the Emperor has no clothes.
For at least four reasons, I reject the church-growth and
church-health principles taught at almost every pastor’s conference, and
expressed in almost every church. Our church will be different, because
I reject these principles. Although different will likely mean odd,
behind-the-times, and shrinking in size, I go there anyway.
I refuse to believe that a “Christian community” will save anyone
Community is the big word today (along with missional…and if you
claim to be a missional community, you are really on the cutting edge).
Churches work hard to design
community. They do it through
small-groups, centered around felt-needs, and gathered in living rooms
across the country. These community groups gather for the bigger
community in a weekly celebration of magnificence. This weekly
celebration has been carefully scripted, from the ridiculously silly and
manipulative countdown screen, to the last triumphant note of victory
at which the community members are sent out to create a Christian
society by building community within their neighborhoods.
These community groups gather for “Bible study,” which is almost
always a double misnomer. The only Scripture used will be out-of-context
references that came from the latest book by the latest Hollywood-looks
celebrity pastor who gathered his thoughts (from the internet?), and
allowed a nameless editor to work them into something profitable. The
group will neither study the passages, nor the book itself. They will
simply read a chapter before they come, spend 45 minutes talking about
the parts they liked, share how the chapter made them feel about
themselves as well as any insights gained, then go away and tell their
friends about their marvelous Bible study. It reminds me of when my dad
told me we were having tube steak for dinner. I was somewhat
disappointed when I found out he just used that lofty sounding name to
refer to hot-dogs. Today much of the Bible study in
missional-communities is the equivalent of tube steak.
Following “Bible study,” the groups engage in fellowship time, then
go on their way as biblically empty as when they arrived. Soon they will
gather for a “mission project” in which they repair a home (painting
the door red so all the town will know that this is one of the homes
repaired by that missional community, and will rise up and call the
missional community wonderful). If not a home repair project, it may be
picking up trash for the city, or painting a dilapidated school, or
providing shoes for shoeless children. The sermon will often be aimed
toward raising up an army of Christians who adopt the orphan, visit the
imprisoned, and blog for social justice.
Even if I believed that these “missions projects” were as successful
as the church websites claim (“we had an awesome God-thing happen at our
last gathering”), I don’t think it has any lasting impact. As I see it,
the Christian is not so much to engage his society, but to come out
from it. The church today is filled with those who are both in the world
and of the world, and who are organized to change the world into a
kinder, gentler place to be. The success rate of the mega-church
missional-church movement has been an utter failure. Society is more
liberal and godless than ever before, with no end to its decline in
sight. The mega-missional church will gather in their multi-campus
celebrations this weekend and slobber over themselves for their
victories, even while these same churches have been totally impotent to
bring about societal change.
Building missional community does nothing more than produce a
feel-good complacency to the community members. Although they live,
assured they are going to be people of impact, as part of a community,
they fail to really make any difference. They fool themselves into
thinking the Emperor’s clothes are superb.
Have you noticed that I’ve not mentioned anything about the
proclamation of the Word, and the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
That’s because there is not much to mention from the church today. The
church today does good works, has good music (in the ears of many), has a
really good sound-system, and a pastor who could lead circles around
Moses. What it doesn’t have is the backbone to proclaim that our world
must reject humanism, social justice, poverty eradication efforts, and
other white-washed measures of “expanding the Kingdom of God”—and, must
find its only hope in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus
Christ.
I reject all manipulation and aim toward persuasion
The second reason I’m leaving the missional-community church-growth
movement is because I reject manipulation of all kinds. In fact, more
than ever before, it disgusts me. The modern church is so built on
manipulation that I’m convinced it could not continue without it.
I recently attended a relatively small Bible-believing,
Bible-teaching church as a guest. I was refreshed to see that almost
every participant had their Bible—and opened—during the sermon. This
told me that the pastor regularly delivers enough verse-by-verse content
that looking up one verse on an iPad just wouldn’t suffice. Bibles, for
this rare congregation, were a necessity. I was also impressed by the
music. It was bad…and that impressed me. It wasn’t polished. There
wasn’t a carefully selected Praise Team who passed the “Sunday morning
test” of looks and sound, dressed in color-coordinated clothing, closing
their eyes and looking to heaven as if they were in an ecstatic moment
(I’ve often seen these
ecstatic moments turn on and off like a
light switch). In fact, the song leader was clearly not a professional,
and his tone was often off just a bit. But the people sang with joy. I
was impressed with their prayers. They prayed for real and legitimate
needs during a Sunday morning service. It would never pass the
church-growth test, because it wasn’t seeker-friendly at all with random
people from the congregation praying at-will over the needs of the
members. As a first-time visitor, I felt out-of-place during that
prayer, and I thought that was wonderful. After all, if I was looking
for a church, I’d want one that really cared about the hurting people
they knew, the flesh-and-blood people who sat in their pews each Sunday.
Most churches (including mine) are not like this. In most churches
(not mine), I wonder if they would be able to continue the “worship” if
the electricity went out. The service is so dependent on mood-lighting,
electric instrumentation, sound amplification, and video enhancement
that it would fall flat in a New York minute with no power. In my
church, thankfully, if the electricity went out, we would give one
another a quick glance and grin, and keep on singing or preaching. If
the electricity-dependent “worship” of the modern church lost
electricity, we would see quickly how much vast emptiness there is in
these churches, and in short-order, the churches would be vastly empty.
No show, no crowd. (Incidentally, I’m not a fan of the black-box
architecture of the missional-community church. This is a total
rejection of centuries of theologically-driven architectural principles
of church design that understood a theology of aesthetics.)
Rejecting manipulation, I won’t do a countdown video before the
service; it simply enhances the idea of a show that is about to begin. I
refuse to only allow the A-team to “perform.” I don’t want soft music
playing while I pray (or preach, or give an invitation). I don’t want
“smart lights” that set the mood, changeable at the push of a button to
fit the tone of the selected song. I don’t want to manipulate my
audience into a certain feeling which will evoke a certain action. Doing
so is sadly too easy, because our generation (as the Bible predicted)
loves the tickling of ears. If you tickle, they will come.
What I do want to provide is persuasion. I want to stand before the
congregation with a persuasive argument from Scripture. As a lawyer
before the jury, I want to present a water-tight case that will change
the thinking of those who have come to hear a Biblical message. I
realize that I do this in a day in which feeling trumps thinking, and so
my kind of persuasive preaching will often be rejected. Persuasive
preaching doesn’t have enough stories, illustrations, and “you can do
it” back-slapping grunts.
I refuse to let my congregation be deceived by good feelings
Thirdly, I reject the missional-community church-growth movement
because it is deceptive. Participants in these churches feel like they
are stalwart conservatives in a Bible-believing, Gospel-proclaiming,
Hell-reducing, Kingdom-expanding church. They consistently proclaim, “My
preacher really preaches the Bible.” True, their preacher does hold up a
Bible and talk about how true and authoritative it is. He even quotes
from the Bible fairly consistently
(“I know the plans I have for you…I will never leave you nor forsake you…I am come that you might have life more abundantly…(and, of course)
bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse”).
What these church members do not know is that they have adopted the
leftist agenda (socialism) or neo-con agenda (reconstructing a Christian
society) which is as empty as it has always been.
I will lose church-growth potential because I won’t allow a
good-feeling production to trump reality. Do my church members know
their Bible? Can they give a defense of the attacks against it? Can they
rightly divide the Word of Truth? Do they have a Biblical worldview
that understands creation (young-earth), eschatology (pre-trib),
salvation (Jesus as propitiatory sacrifice), grace (free from the Law),
and so much more? Have I developed a congregation that could, and would,
stick with it through a months-long study of the book of Numbers? Or
Leviticus? If I have not developed this kind of Biblical hunger, then
I’ve just allowed them to be deceived by thinking they’ve had Bible
study, experienced worship, and come away a better (and more
Christ-like) person. Since I will stand before God someday to be judged
for reality (not feelings), I will be satisfied to spend my time and
energy developing a Biblically-literate congregation.
I reject the church as a program organization over which I am the CEO
Finally, the CEO model of Pastor has to go. I know that almost every
missional-community church-growth model pastor’s conference says this
same thing, continually reminding pastors that they are not CEOs. Then,
having given the obligatory rejection of CEO style leadership, they tell
the Pastor that he should be known as the “Lead Pastor” (lead…short for
leadership, a key CEO trait). They instruct him in the best means of
vision development and “vision casting.” They Peter Drucker him to
spiritual death. They study the Bible, not looking for Biblical truth,
but looking for leadership traits of Moses (one of the worst leaders of
all time), Gideon (zero leadership capability), Nehemiah (who was not a
priest nor a pastor, but a government official), Jesus (who did nothing
but follow His Father), or Paul (who said pastors should “preach the
Word”).
Going further, these pastor’s conferences (or books) talk about all
the programs and paradigms the church could/should implement to develop
its missional-community. Of course, as soon as you create any kind of
ministry (i.e.
program) in the church, it requires some
oversight, which requires the Pastor to leave his pastoral function and
begin acting like the conference/book instructed him to act: like a
leader.
Don’t call me Lead Pastor. Don’t call me Senior Pastor (been there,
done that). Don’t call me Teaching Pastor (is there any other kind?).
Just call me Pastor, and let me devote my life to prayer and the
ministry of the Word, ministering to the flock under my care. I happen
to believe that if a person attends a church where they cannot call the
Pastor and talk to him, they don’t really have a Pastor.
Conclusion
I’ve just rejected everything that has become the favorite methods of
the missional-community church, which it uses as it bows down to its
idol called church-growth. I’m sure some have said “amen” all the
way through. If that was you, you’ve probably struggled to find a place
to worship and call your church home. Others have come to the end with a
righteous rage, wondering how I could so “not get it.” Whichever side
you are on, I encourage you to run to the Bible and use it as your only
source of revelation about the will of God in church, society, and your
own personal life.
- See more at: http://www.randywhiteministries.org/2014/01/02/leaving-church-growth-movement/#sthash.8hixiSwL.dpuf
Dr. Randy White

Church
growth is all the rage. For pastors, the focus is on leadership. For
laymen, on “reaching people.” In the church world, church-growth is the
standard of success. If a church “reaches people,” and the pastor is a
“visionary leader,” then the church will be considered a success. If a
church makes it into somebody’s bogus “Fastest Growing Church” list,
then the growth frenzy continues with the sheep flocking to check out
what innovation has been initiated to reach the masses for Christ.
Personally, I think the Emperor has no clothes.
For at least four reasons, I reject the church-growth and
church-health principles taught at almost every pastor’s conference, and
expressed in almost every church. Our church will be different, because
I reject these principles. Although different will likely mean odd,
behind-the-times, and shrinking in size, I go there anyway.
I refuse to believe that a “Christian community” will save anyone
Community is the big word today (along with missional…and if you
claim to be a missional community, you are really on the cutting edge).
Churches work hard to design
community. They do it through
small-groups, centered around felt-needs, and gathered in living rooms
across the country. These community groups gather for the bigger
community in a weekly celebration of magnificence. This weekly
celebration has been carefully scripted, from the ridiculously silly and
manipulative countdown screen, to the last triumphant note of victory
at which the community members are sent out to create a Christian
society by building community within their neighborhoods.
These community groups gather for “Bible study,” which is almost
always a double misnomer. The only Scripture used will be out-of-context
references that came from the latest book by the latest Hollywood-looks
celebrity pastor who gathered his thoughts (from the internet?), and
allowed a nameless editor to work them into something profitable. The
group will neither study the passages, nor the book itself. They will
simply read a chapter before they come, spend 45 minutes talking about
the parts they liked, share how the chapter made them feel about
themselves as well as any insights gained, then go away and tell their
friends about their marvelous Bible study. It reminds me of when my dad
told me we were having tube steak for dinner. I was somewhat
disappointed when I found out he just used that lofty sounding name to
refer to hot-dogs. Today much of the Bible study in
missional-communities is the equivalent of tube steak.
Following “Bible study,” the groups engage in fellowship time, then
go on their way as biblically empty as when they arrived. Soon they will
gather for a “mission project” in which they repair a home (painting
the door red so all the town will know that this is one of the homes
repaired by that missional community, and will rise up and call the
missional community wonderful). If not a home repair project, it may be
picking up trash for the city, or painting a dilapidated school, or
providing shoes for shoeless children. The sermon will often be aimed
toward raising up an army of Christians who adopt the orphan, visit the
imprisoned, and blog for social justice.
Even if I believed that these “missions projects” were as successful
as the church websites claim (“we had an awesome God-thing happen at our
last gathering”), I don’t think it has any lasting impact. As I see it,
the Christian is not so much to engage his society, but to come out
from it. The church today is filled with those who are both in the world
and of the world, and who are organized to change the world into a
kinder, gentler place to be. The success rate of the mega-church
missional-church movement has been an utter failure. Society is more
liberal and godless than ever before, with no end to its decline in
sight. The mega-missional church will gather in their multi-campus
celebrations this weekend and slobber over themselves for their
victories, even while these same churches have been totally impotent to
bring about societal change.
Building missional community does nothing more than produce a
feel-good complacency to the community members. Although they live,
assured they are going to be people of impact, as part of a community,
they fail to really make any difference. They fool themselves into
thinking the Emperor’s clothes are superb.
Have you noticed that I’ve not mentioned anything about the
proclamation of the Word, and the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
That’s because there is not much to mention from the church today. The
church today does good works, has good music (in the ears of many), has a
really good sound-system, and a pastor who could lead circles around
Moses. What it doesn’t have is the backbone to proclaim that our world
must reject humanism, social justice, poverty eradication efforts, and
other white-washed measures of “expanding the Kingdom of God”—and, must
find its only hope in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus
Christ.
I reject all manipulation and aim toward persuasion
The second reason I’m leaving the missional-community church-growth
movement is because I reject manipulation of all kinds. In fact, more
than ever before, it disgusts me. The modern church is so built on
manipulation that I’m convinced it could not continue without it.
I recently attended a relatively small Bible-believing,
Bible-teaching church as a guest. I was refreshed to see that almost
every participant had their Bible—and opened—during the sermon. This
told me that the pastor regularly delivers enough verse-by-verse content
that looking up one verse on an iPad just wouldn’t suffice. Bibles, for
this rare congregation, were a necessity. I was also impressed by the
music. It was bad…and that impressed me. It wasn’t polished. There
wasn’t a carefully selected Praise Team who passed the “Sunday morning
test” of looks and sound, dressed in color-coordinated clothing, closing
their eyes and looking to heaven as if they were in an ecstatic moment
(I’ve often seen these
ecstatic moments turn on and off like a
light switch). In fact, the song leader was clearly not a professional,
and his tone was often off just a bit. But the people sang with joy. I
was impressed with their prayers. They prayed for real and legitimate
needs during a Sunday morning service. It would never pass the
church-growth test, because it wasn’t seeker-friendly at all with random
people from the congregation praying at-will over the needs of the
members. As a first-time visitor, I felt out-of-place during that
prayer, and I thought that was wonderful. After all, if I was looking
for a church, I’d want one that really cared about the hurting people
they knew, the flesh-and-blood people who sat in their pews each Sunday.
Most churches (including mine) are not like this. In most churches
(not mine), I wonder if they would be able to continue the “worship” if
the electricity went out. The service is so dependent on mood-lighting,
electric instrumentation, sound amplification, and video enhancement
that it would fall flat in a New York minute with no power. In my
church, thankfully, if the electricity went out, we would give one
another a quick glance and grin, and keep on singing or preaching. If
the electricity-dependent “worship” of the modern church lost
electricity, we would see quickly how much vast emptiness there is in
these churches, and in short-order, the churches would be vastly empty.
No show, no crowd. (Incidentally, I’m not a fan of the black-box
architecture of the missional-community church. This is a total
rejection of centuries of theologically-driven architectural principles
of church design that understood a theology of aesthetics.)
Rejecting manipulation, I won’t do a countdown video before the
service; it simply enhances the idea of a show that is about to begin. I
refuse to only allow the A-team to “perform.” I don’t want soft music
playing while I pray (or preach, or give an invitation). I don’t want
“smart lights” that set the mood, changeable at the push of a button to
fit the tone of the selected song. I don’t want to manipulate my
audience into a certain feeling which will evoke a certain action. Doing
so is sadly too easy, because our generation (as the Bible predicted)
loves the tickling of ears. If you tickle, they will come.
What I do want to provide is persuasion. I want to stand before the
congregation with a persuasive argument from Scripture. As a lawyer
before the jury, I want to present a water-tight case that will change
the thinking of those who have come to hear a Biblical message. I
realize that I do this in a day in which feeling trumps thinking, and so
my kind of persuasive preaching will often be rejected. Persuasive
preaching doesn’t have enough stories, illustrations, and “you can do
it” back-slapping grunts.
I refuse to let my congregation be deceived by good feelings
Thirdly, I reject the missional-community church-growth movement
because it is deceptive. Participants in these churches feel like they
are stalwart conservatives in a Bible-believing, Gospel-proclaiming,
Hell-reducing, Kingdom-expanding church. They consistently proclaim, “My
preacher really preaches the Bible.” True, their preacher does hold up a
Bible and talk about how true and authoritative it is. He even quotes
from the Bible fairly consistently
(“I know the plans I have for you…I will never leave you nor forsake you…I am come that you might have life more abundantly…(and, of course)
bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse”).
What these church members do not know is that they have adopted the
leftist agenda (socialism) or neo-con agenda (reconstructing a Christian
society) which is as empty as it has always been.
I will lose church-growth potential because I won’t allow a
good-feeling production to trump reality. Do my church members know
their Bible? Can they give a defense of the attacks against it? Can they
rightly divide the Word of Truth? Do they have a Biblical worldview
that understands creation (young-earth), eschatology (pre-trib),
salvation (Jesus as propitiatory sacrifice), grace (free from the Law),
and so much more? Have I developed a congregation that could, and would,
stick with it through a months-long study of the book of Numbers? Or
Leviticus? If I have not developed this kind of Biblical hunger, then
I’ve just allowed them to be deceived by thinking they’ve had Bible
study, experienced worship, and come away a better (and more
Christ-like) person. Since I will stand before God someday to be judged
for reality (not feelings), I will be satisfied to spend my time and
energy developing a Biblically-literate congregation.
I reject the church as a program organization over which I am the CEO
Finally, the CEO model of Pastor has to go. I know that almost every
missional-community church-growth model pastor’s conference says this
same thing, continually reminding pastors that they are not CEOs. Then,
having given the obligatory rejection of CEO style leadership, they tell
the Pastor that he should be known as the “Lead Pastor” (lead…short for
leadership, a key CEO trait). They instruct him in the best means of
vision development and “vision casting.” They Peter Drucker him to
spiritual death. They study the Bible, not looking for Biblical truth,
but looking for leadership traits of Moses (one of the worst leaders of
all time), Gideon (zero leadership capability), Nehemiah (who was not a
priest nor a pastor, but a government official), Jesus (who did nothing
but follow His Father), or Paul (who said pastors should “preach the
Word”).
Going further, these pastor’s conferences (or books) talk about all
the programs and paradigms the church could/should implement to develop
its missional-community. Of course, as soon as you create any kind of
ministry (i.e.
program) in the church, it requires some
oversight, which requires the Pastor to leave his pastoral function and
begin acting like the conference/book instructed him to act: like a
leader.
Don’t call me Lead Pastor. Don’t call me Senior Pastor (been there,
done that). Don’t call me Teaching Pastor (is there any other kind?).
Just call me Pastor, and let me devote my life to prayer and the
ministry of the Word, ministering to the flock under my care. I happen
to believe that if a person attends a church where they cannot call the
Pastor and talk to him, they don’t really have a Pastor.
Conclusion
I’ve just rejected everything that has become the favorite methods of
the missional-community church, which it uses as it bows down to its
idol called church-growth. I’m sure some have said “amen” all the
way through. If that was you, you’ve probably struggled to find a place
to worship and call your church home. Others have come to the end with a
righteous rage, wondering how I could so “not get it.” Whichever side
you are on, I encourage you to run to the Bible and use it as your only
source of revelation about the will of God in church, society, and your
own personal life
- See more at: http://www.randywhiteministries.org/2014/01/02/leaving-church-growth-movement/#sthash.62JoFiZ2.dpuf
Dr. Randy White

Church
growth is all the rage. For pastors, the focus is on leadership. For
laymen, on “reaching people.” In the church world, church-growth is the
standard of success. If a church “reaches people,” and the pastor is a
“visionary leader,” then the church will be considered a success. If a
church makes it into somebody’s bogus “Fastest Growing Church” list,
then the growth frenzy continues with the sheep flocking to check out
what innovation has been initiated to reach the masses for Christ.
Personally, I think the Emperor has no clothes.
For at least four reasons, I reject the church-growth and
church-health principles taught at almost every pastor’s conference, and
expressed in almost every church. Our church will be different, because
I reject these principles. Although different will likely mean odd,
behind-the-times, and shrinking in size, I go there anyway.
I refuse to believe that a “Christian community” will save anyone
Community is the big word today (along with missional…and if you
claim to be a missional community, you are really on the cutting edge).
Churches work hard to design
community. They do it through
small-groups, centered around felt-needs, and gathered in living rooms
across the country. These community groups gather for the bigger
community in a weekly celebration of magnificence. This weekly
celebration has been carefully scripted, from the ridiculously silly and
manipulative countdown screen, to the last triumphant note of victory
at which the community members are sent out to create a Christian
society by building community within their neighborhoods.
These community groups gather for “Bible study,” which is almost
always a double misnomer. The only Scripture used will be out-of-context
references that came from the latest book by the latest Hollywood-looks
celebrity pastor who gathered his thoughts (from the internet?), and
allowed a nameless editor to work them into something profitable. The
group will neither study the passages, nor the book itself. They will
simply read a chapter before they come, spend 45 minutes talking about
the parts they liked, share how the chapter made them feel about
themselves as well as any insights gained, then go away and tell their
friends about their marvelous Bible study. It reminds me of when my dad
told me we were having tube steak for dinner. I was somewhat
disappointed when I found out he just used that lofty sounding name to
refer to hot-dogs. Today much of the Bible study in
missional-communities is the equivalent of tube steak.
Following “Bible study,” the groups engage in fellowship time, then
go on their way as biblically empty as when they arrived. Soon they will
gather for a “mission project” in which they repair a home (painting
the door red so all the town will know that this is one of the homes
repaired by that missional community, and will rise up and call the
missional community wonderful). If not a home repair project, it may be
picking up trash for the city, or painting a dilapidated school, or
providing shoes for shoeless children. The sermon will often be aimed
toward raising up an army of Christians who adopt the orphan, visit the
imprisoned, and blog for social justice.
Even if I believed that these “missions projects” were as successful
as the church websites claim (“we had an awesome God-thing happen at our
last gathering”), I don’t think it has any lasting impact. As I see it,
the Christian is not so much to engage his society, but to come out
from it. The church today is filled with those who are both in the world
and of the world, and who are organized to change the world into a
kinder, gentler place to be. The success rate of the mega-church
missional-church movement has been an utter failure. Society is more
liberal and godless than ever before, with no end to its decline in
sight. The mega-missional church will gather in their multi-campus
celebrations this weekend and slobber over themselves for their
victories, even while these same churches have been totally impotent to
bring about societal change.
Building missional community does nothing more than produce a
feel-good complacency to the community members. Although they live,
assured they are going to be people of impact, as part of a community,
they fail to really make any difference. They fool themselves into
thinking the Emperor’s clothes are superb.
Have you noticed that I’ve not mentioned anything about the
proclamation of the Word, and the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
That’s because there is not much to mention from the church today. The
church today does good works, has good music (in the ears of many), has a
really good sound-system, and a pastor who could lead circles around
Moses. What it doesn’t have is the backbone to proclaim that our world
must reject humanism, social justice, poverty eradication efforts, and
other white-washed measures of “expanding the Kingdom of God”—and, must
find its only hope in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus
Christ.
I reject all manipulation and aim toward persuasion
The second reason I’m leaving the missional-community church-growth
movement is because I reject manipulation of all kinds. In fact, more
than ever before, it disgusts me. The modern church is so built on
manipulation that I’m convinced it could not continue without it.
I recently attended a relatively small Bible-believing,
Bible-teaching church as a guest. I was refreshed to see that almost
every participant had their Bible—and opened—during the sermon. This
told me that the pastor regularly delivers enough verse-by-verse content
that looking up one verse on an iPad just wouldn’t suffice. Bibles, for
this rare congregation, were a necessity. I was also impressed by the
music. It was bad…and that impressed me. It wasn’t polished. There
wasn’t a carefully selected Praise Team who passed the “Sunday morning
test” of looks and sound, dressed in color-coordinated clothing, closing
their eyes and looking to heaven as if they were in an ecstatic moment
(I’ve often seen these
ecstatic moments turn on and off like a
light switch). In fact, the song leader was clearly not a professional,
and his tone was often off just a bit. But the people sang with joy. I
was impressed with their prayers. They prayed for real and legitimate
needs during a Sunday morning service. It would never pass the
church-growth test, because it wasn’t seeker-friendly at all with random
people from the congregation praying at-will over the needs of the
members. As a first-time visitor, I felt out-of-place during that
prayer, and I thought that was wonderful. After all, if I was looking
for a church, I’d want one that really cared about the hurting people
they knew, the flesh-and-blood people who sat in their pews each Sunday.
Most churches (including mine) are not like this. In most churches
(not mine), I wonder if they would be able to continue the “worship” if
the electricity went out. The service is so dependent on mood-lighting,
electric instrumentation, sound amplification, and video enhancement
that it would fall flat in a New York minute with no power. In my
church, thankfully, if the electricity went out, we would give one
another a quick glance and grin, and keep on singing or preaching. If
the electricity-dependent “worship” of the modern church lost
electricity, we would see quickly how much vast emptiness there is in
these churches, and in short-order, the churches would be vastly empty.
No show, no crowd. (Incidentally, I’m not a fan of the black-box
architecture of the missional-community church. This is a total
rejection of centuries of theologically-driven architectural principles
of church design that understood a theology of aesthetics.)
Rejecting manipulation, I won’t do a countdown video before the
service; it simply enhances the idea of a show that is about to begin. I
refuse to only allow the A-team to “perform.” I don’t want soft music
playing while I pray (or preach, or give an invitation). I don’t want
“smart lights” that set the mood, changeable at the push of a button to
fit the tone of the selected song. I don’t want to manipulate my
audience into a certain feeling which will evoke a certain action. Doing
so is sadly too easy, because our generation (as the Bible predicted)
loves the tickling of ears. If you tickle, they will come.
What I do want to provide is persuasion. I want to stand before the
congregation with a persuasive argument from Scripture. As a lawyer
before the jury, I want to present a water-tight case that will change
the thinking of those who have come to hear a Biblical message. I
realize that I do this in a day in which feeling trumps thinking, and so
my kind of persuasive preaching will often be rejected. Persuasive
preaching doesn’t have enough stories, illustrations, and “you can do
it” back-slapping grunts.
I refuse to let my congregation be deceived by good feelings
Thirdly, I reject the missional-community church-growth movement
because it is deceptive. Participants in these churches feel like they
are stalwart conservatives in a Bible-believing, Gospel-proclaiming,
Hell-reducing, Kingdom-expanding church. They consistently proclaim, “My
preacher really preaches the Bible.” True, their preacher does hold up a
Bible and talk about how true and authoritative it is. He even quotes
from the Bible fairly consistently
(“I know the plans I have for you…I will never leave you nor forsake you…I am come that you might have life more abundantly…(and, of course)
bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse”).
What these church members do not know is that they have adopted the
leftist agenda (socialism) or neo-con agenda (reconstructing a Christian
society) which is as empty as it has always been.
I will lose church-growth potential because I won’t allow a
good-feeling production to trump reality. Do my church members know
their Bible? Can they give a defense of the attacks against it? Can they
rightly divide the Word of Truth? Do they have a Biblical worldview
that understands creation (young-earth), eschatology (pre-trib),
salvation (Jesus as propitiatory sacrifice), grace (free from the Law),
and so much more? Have I developed a congregation that could, and would,
stick with it through a months-long study of the book of Numbers? Or
Leviticus? If I have not developed this kind of Biblical hunger, then
I’ve just allowed them to be deceived by thinking they’ve had Bible
study, experienced worship, and come away a better (and more
Christ-like) person. Since I will stand before God someday to be judged
for reality (not feelings), I will be satisfied to spend my time and
energy developing a Biblically-literate congregation.
I reject the church as a program organization over which I am the CEO
Finally, the CEO model of Pastor has to go. I know that almost every
missional-community church-growth model pastor’s conference says this
same thing, continually reminding pastors that they are not CEOs. Then,
having given the obligatory rejection of CEO style leadership, they tell
the Pastor that he should be known as the “Lead Pastor” (lead…short for
leadership, a key CEO trait). They instruct him in the best means of
vision development and “vision casting.” They Peter Drucker him to
spiritual death. They study the Bible, not looking for Biblical truth,
but looking for leadership traits of Moses (one of the worst leaders of
all time), Gideon (zero leadership capability), Nehemiah (who was not a
priest nor a pastor, but a government official), Jesus (who did nothing
but follow His Father), or Paul (who said pastors should “preach the
Word”).
Going further, these pastor’s conferences (or books) talk about all
the programs and paradigms the church could/should implement to develop
its missional-community. Of course, as soon as you create any kind of
ministry (i.e.
program) in the church, it requires some
oversight, which requires the Pastor to leave his pastoral function and
begin acting like the conference/book instructed him to act: like a
leader.
Don’t call me Lead Pastor. Don’t call me Senior Pastor (been there,
done that). Don’t call me Teaching Pastor (is there any other kind?).
Just call me Pastor, and let me devote my life to prayer and the
ministry of the Word, ministering to the flock under my care. I happen
to believe that if a person attends a church where they cannot call the
Pastor and talk to him, they don’t really have a Pastor.
Conclusion
I’ve just rejected everything that has become the favorite methods of
the missional-community church, which it uses as it bows down to its
idol called church-growth. I’m sure some have said “amen” all the
way through. If that was you, you’ve probably struggled to find a place
to worship and call your church home. Others have come to the end with a
righteous rage, wondering how I could so “not get it.” Whichever side
you are on, I encourage you to run to the Bible and use it as your only
source of revelation about the will of God in church, society, and your
own personal life.
- See more at: http://www.randywhiteministries.org/2014/01/02/leaving-church-growth-movement/#sthash.62JoFiZ2.dpuf
Dr. Randy White

Church
growth is all the rage. For pastors, the focus is on leadership. For
laymen, on “reaching people.” In the church world, church-growth is the
standard of success. If a church “reaches people,” and the pastor is a
“visionary leader,” then the church will be considered a success. If a
church makes it into somebody’s bogus “Fastest Growing Church” list,
then the growth frenzy continues with the sheep flocking to check out
what innovation has been initiated to reach the masses for Christ.
Personally, I think the Emperor has no clothes.
For at least four reasons, I reject the church-growth and
church-health principles taught at almost every pastor’s conference, and
expressed in almost every church. Our church will be different, because
I reject these principles. Although different will likely mean odd,
behind-the-times, and shrinking in size, I go there anyway.
I refuse to believe that a “Christian community” will save anyone
Community is the big word today (along with missional…and if you
claim to be a missional community, you are really on the cutting edge).
Churches work hard to design
community. They do it through
small-groups, centered around felt-needs, and gathered in living rooms
across the country. These community groups gather for the bigger
community in a weekly celebration of magnificence. This weekly
celebration has been carefully scripted, from the ridiculously silly and
manipulative countdown screen, to the last triumphant note of victory
at which the community members are sent out to create a Christian
society by building community within their neighborhoods.
These community groups gather for “Bible study,” which is almost
always a double misnomer. The only Scripture used will be out-of-context
references that came from the latest book by the latest Hollywood-looks
celebrity pastor who gathered his thoughts (from the internet?), and
allowed a nameless editor to work them into something profitable. The
group will neither study the passages, nor the book itself. They will
simply read a chapter before they come, spend 45 minutes talking about
the parts they liked, share how the chapter made them feel about
themselves as well as any insights gained, then go away and tell their
friends about their marvelous Bible study. It reminds me of when my dad
told me we were having tube steak for dinner. I was somewhat
disappointed when I found out he just used that lofty sounding name to
refer to hot-dogs. Today much of the Bible study in
missional-communities is the equivalent of tube steak.
Following “Bible study,” the groups engage in fellowship time, then
go on their way as biblically empty as when they arrived. Soon they will
gather for a “mission project” in which they repair a home (painting
the door red so all the town will know that this is one of the homes
repaired by that missional community, and will rise up and call the
missional community wonderful). If not a home repair project, it may be
picking up trash for the city, or painting a dilapidated school, or
providing shoes for shoeless children. The sermon will often be aimed
toward raising up an army of Christians who adopt the orphan, visit the
imprisoned, and blog for social justice.
Even if I believed that these “missions projects” were as successful
as the church websites claim (“we had an awesome God-thing happen at our
last gathering”), I don’t think it has any lasting impact. As I see it,
the Christian is not so much to engage his society, but to come out
from it. The church today is filled with those who are both in the world
and of the world, and who are organized to change the world into a
kinder, gentler place to be. The success rate of the mega-church
missional-church movement has been an utter failure. Society is more
liberal and godless than ever before, with no end to its decline in
sight. The mega-missional church will gather in their multi-campus
celebrations this weekend and slobber over themselves for their
victories, even while these same churches have been totally impotent to
bring about societal change.
Building missional community does nothing more than produce a
feel-good complacency to the community members. Although they live,
assured they are going to be people of impact, as part of a community,
they fail to really make any difference. They fool themselves into
thinking the Emperor’s clothes are superb.
Have you noticed that I’ve not mentioned anything about the
proclamation of the Word, and the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
That’s because there is not much to mention from the church today. The
church today does good works, has good music (in the ears of many), has a
really good sound-system, and a pastor who could lead circles around
Moses. What it doesn’t have is the backbone to proclaim that our world
must reject humanism, social justice, poverty eradication efforts, and
other white-washed measures of “expanding the Kingdom of God”—and, must
find its only hope in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus
Christ.
I reject all manipulation and aim toward persuasion
The second reason I’m leaving the missional-community church-growth
movement is because I reject manipulation of all kinds. In fact, more
than ever before, it disgusts me. The modern church is so built on
manipulation that I’m convinced it could not continue without it.
I recently attended a relatively small Bible-believing,
Bible-teaching church as a guest. I was refreshed to see that almost
every participant had their Bible—and opened—during the sermon. This
told me that the pastor regularly delivers enough verse-by-verse content
that looking up one verse on an iPad just wouldn’t suffice. Bibles, for
this rare congregation, were a necessity. I was also impressed by the
music. It was bad…and that impressed me. It wasn’t polished. There
wasn’t a carefully selected Praise Team who passed the “Sunday morning
test” of looks and sound, dressed in color-coordinated clothing, closing
their eyes and looking to heaven as if they were in an ecstatic moment
(I’ve often seen these
ecstatic moments turn on and off like a
light switch). In fact, the song leader was clearly not a professional,
and his tone was often off just a bit. But the people sang with joy. I
was impressed with their prayers. They prayed for real and legitimate
needs during a Sunday morning service. It would never pass the
church-growth test, because it wasn’t seeker-friendly at all with random
people from the congregation praying at-will over the needs of the
members. As a first-time visitor, I felt out-of-place during that
prayer, and I thought that was wonderful. After all, if I was looking
for a church, I’d want one that really cared about the hurting people
they knew, the flesh-and-blood people who sat in their pews each Sunday.
Most churches (including mine) are not like this. In most churches
(not mine), I wonder if they would be able to continue the “worship” if
the electricity went out. The service is so dependent on mood-lighting,
electric instrumentation, sound amplification, and video enhancement
that it would fall flat in a New York minute with no power. In my
church, thankfully, if the electricity went out, we would give one
another a quick glance and grin, and keep on singing or preaching. If
the electricity-dependent “worship” of the modern church lost
electricity, we would see quickly how much vast emptiness there is in
these churches, and in short-order, the churches would be vastly empty.
No show, no crowd. (Incidentally, I’m not a fan of the black-box
architecture of the missional-community church. This is a total
rejection of centuries of theologically-driven architectural principles
of church design that understood a theology of aesthetics.)
Rejecting manipulation, I won’t do a countdown video before the
service; it simply enhances the idea of a show that is about to begin. I
refuse to only allow the A-team to “perform.” I don’t want soft music
playing while I pray (or preach, or give an invitation). I don’t want
“smart lights” that set the mood, changeable at the push of a button to
fit the tone of the selected song. I don’t want to manipulate my
audience into a certain feeling which will evoke a certain action. Doing
so is sadly too easy, because our generation (as the Bible predicted)
loves the tickling of ears. If you tickle, they will come.
What I do want to provide is persuasion. I want to stand before the
congregation with a persuasive argument from Scripture. As a lawyer
before the jury, I want to present a water-tight case that will change
the thinking of those who have come to hear a Biblical message. I
realize that I do this in a day in which feeling trumps thinking, and so
my kind of persuasive preaching will often be rejected. Persuasive
preaching doesn’t have enough stories, illustrations, and “you can do
it” back-slapping grunts.
I refuse to let my congregation be deceived by good feelings
Thirdly, I reject the missional-community church-growth movement
because it is deceptive. Participants in these churches feel like they
are stalwart conservatives in a Bible-believing, Gospel-proclaiming,
Hell-reducing, Kingdom-expanding church. They consistently proclaim, “My
preacher really preaches the Bible.” True, their preacher does hold up a
Bible and talk about how true and authoritative it is. He even quotes
from the Bible fairly consistently
(“I know the plans I have for you…I will never leave you nor forsake you…I am come that you might have life more abundantly…(and, of course)
bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse”).
What these church members do not know is that they have adopted the
leftist agenda (socialism) or neo-con agenda (reconstructing a Christian
society) which is as empty as it has always been.
I will lose church-growth potential because I won’t allow a
good-feeling production to trump reality. Do my church members know
their Bible? Can they give a defense of the attacks against it? Can they
rightly divide the Word of Truth? Do they have a Biblical worldview
that understands creation (young-earth), eschatology (pre-trib),
salvation (Jesus as propitiatory sacrifice), grace (free from the Law),
and so much more? Have I developed a congregation that could, and would,
stick with it through a months-long study of the book of Numbers? Or
Leviticus? If I have not developed this kind of Biblical hunger, then
I’ve just allowed them to be deceived by thinking they’ve had Bible
study, experienced worship, and come away a better (and more
Christ-like) person. Since I will stand before God someday to be judged
for reality (not feelings), I will be satisfied to spend my time and
energy developing a Biblically-literate congregation.
I reject the church as a program organization over which I am the CEO
Finally, the CEO model of Pastor has to go. I know that almost every
missional-community church-growth model pastor’s conference says this
same thing, continually reminding pastors that they are not CEOs. Then,
having given the obligatory rejection of CEO style leadership, they tell
the Pastor that he should be known as the “Lead Pastor” (lead…short for
leadership, a key CEO trait). They instruct him in the best means of
vision development and “vision casting.” They Peter Drucker him to
spiritual death. They study the Bible, not looking for Biblical truth,
but looking for leadership traits of Moses (one of the worst leaders of
all time), Gideon (zero leadership capability), Nehemiah (who was not a
priest nor a pastor, but a government official), Jesus (who did nothing
but follow His Father), or Paul (who said pastors should “preach the
Word”).
Going further, these pastor’s conferences (or books) talk about all
the programs and paradigms the church could/should implement to develop
its missional-community. Of course, as soon as you create any kind of
ministry (i.e.
program) in the church, it requires some
oversight, which requires the Pastor to leave his pastoral function and
begin acting like the conference/book instructed him to act: like a
leader.
Don’t call me Lead Pastor. Don’t call me Senior Pastor (been there,
done that). Don’t call me Teaching Pastor (is there any other kind?).
Just call me Pastor, and let me devote my life to prayer and the
ministry of the Word, ministering to the flock under my care. I happen
to believe that if a person attends a church where they cannot call the
Pastor and talk to him, they don’t really have a Pastor.
Conclusion
I’ve just rejected everything that has become the favorite methods of
the missional-community church, which it uses as it bows down to its
idol called church-growth. I’m sure some have said “amen” all the
way through. If that was you, you’ve probably struggled to find a place
to worship and call your church home. Others have come to the end with a
righteous rage, wondering how I could so “not get it.” Whichever side
you are on, I encourage you to run to the Bible and use it as your only
source of revelation about the will of God in church, society, and your
own personal life.
- See more at: http://www.randywhiteministries.org/2014/01/02/leaving-church-growth-movement/#sthash.62JoFiZ2.dpuf
Dr. Randy White

Church
growth is all the rage. For pastors, the focus is on leadership. For
laymen, on “reaching people.” In the church world, church-growth is the
standard of success. If a church “reaches people,” and the pastor is a
“visionary leader,” then the church will be considered a success. If a
church makes it into somebody’s bogus “Fastest Growing Church” list,
then the growth frenzy continues with the sheep flocking to check out
what innovation has been initiated to reach the masses for Christ.
Personally, I think the Emperor has no clothes.
For at least four reasons, I reject the church-growth and
church-health principles taught at almost every pastor’s conference, and
expressed in almost every church. Our church will be different, because
I reject these principles. Although different will likely mean odd,
behind-the-times, and shrinking in size, I go there anyway.
I refuse to believe that a “Christian community” will save anyone
Community is the big word today (along with missional…and if you
claim to be a missional community, you are really on the cutting edge).
Churches work hard to design
community. They do it through
small-groups, centered around felt-needs, and gathered in living rooms
across the country. These community groups gather for the bigger
community in a weekly celebration of magnificence. This weekly
celebration has been carefully scripted, from the ridiculously silly and
manipulative countdown screen, to the last triumphant note of victory
at which the community members are sent out to create a Christian
society by building community within their neighborhoods.
These community groups gather for “Bible study,” which is almost
always a double misnomer. The only Scripture used will be out-of-context
references that came from the latest book by the latest Hollywood-looks
celebrity pastor who gathered his thoughts (from the internet?), and
allowed a nameless editor to work them into something profitable. The
group will neither study the passages, nor the book itself. They will
simply read a chapter before they come, spend 45 minutes talking about
the parts they liked, share how the chapter made them feel about
themselves as well as any insights gained, then go away and tell their
friends about their marvelous Bible study. It reminds me of when my dad
told me we were having tube steak for dinner. I was somewhat
disappointed when I found out he just used that lofty sounding name to
refer to hot-dogs. Today much of the Bible study in
missional-communities is the equivalent of tube steak.
Following “Bible study,” the groups engage in fellowship time, then
go on their way as biblically empty as when they arrived. Soon they will
gather for a “mission project” in which they repair a home (painting
the door red so all the town will know that this is one of the homes
repaired by that missional community, and will rise up and call the
missional community wonderful). If not a home repair project, it may be
picking up trash for the city, or painting a dilapidated school, or
providing shoes for shoeless children. The sermon will often be aimed
toward raising up an army of Christians who adopt the orphan, visit the
imprisoned, and blog for social justice.
Even if I believed that these “missions projects” were as successful
as the church websites claim (“we had an awesome God-thing happen at our
last gathering”), I don’t think it has any lasting impact. As I see it,
the Christian is not so much to engage his society, but to come out
from it. The church today is filled with those who are both in the world
and of the world, and who are organized to change the world into a
kinder, gentler place to be. The success rate of the mega-church
missional-church movement has been an utter failure. Society is more
liberal and godless than ever before, with no end to its decline in
sight. The mega-missional church will gather in their multi-campus
celebrations this weekend and slobber over themselves for their
victories, even while these same churches have been totally impotent to
bring about societal change.
Building missional community does nothing more than produce a
feel-good complacency to the community members. Although they live,
assured they are going to be people of impact, as part of a community,
they fail to really make any difference. They fool themselves into
thinking the Emperor’s clothes are superb.
Have you noticed that I’ve not mentioned anything about the
proclamation of the Word, and the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
That’s because there is not much to mention from the church today. The
church today does good works, has good music (in the ears of many), has a
really good sound-system, and a pastor who could lead circles around
Moses. What it doesn’t have is the backbone to proclaim that our world
must reject humanism, social justice, poverty eradication efforts, and
other white-washed measures of “expanding the Kingdom of God”—and, must
find its only hope in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus
Christ.
I reject all manipulation and aim toward persuasion
The second reason I’m leaving the missional-community church-growth
movement is because I reject manipulation of all kinds. In fact, more
than ever before, it disgusts me. The modern church is so built on
manipulation that I’m convinced it could not continue without it.
I recently attended a relatively small Bible-believing,
Bible-teaching church as a guest. I was refreshed to see that almost
every participant had their Bible—and opened—during the sermon. This
told me that the pastor regularly delivers enough verse-by-verse content
that looking up one verse on an iPad just wouldn’t suffice. Bibles, for
this rare congregation, were a necessity. I was also impressed by the
music. It was bad…and that impressed me. It wasn’t polished. There
wasn’t a carefully selected Praise Team who passed the “Sunday morning
test” of looks and sound, dressed in color-coordinated clothing, closing
their eyes and looking to heaven as if they were in an ecstatic moment
(I’ve often seen these
ecstatic moments turn on and off like a
light switch). In fact, the song leader was clearly not a professional,
and his tone was often off just a bit. But the people sang with joy. I
was impressed with their prayers. They prayed for real and legitimate
needs during a Sunday morning service. It would never pass the
church-growth test, because it wasn’t seeker-friendly at all with random
people from the congregation praying at-will over the needs of the
members. As a first-time visitor, I felt out-of-place during that
prayer, and I thought that was wonderful. After all, if I was looking
for a church, I’d want one that really cared about the hurting people
they knew, the flesh-and-blood people who sat in their pews each Sunday.
Most churches (including mine) are not like this. In most churches
(not mine), I wonder if they would be able to continue the “worship” if
the electricity went out. The service is so dependent on mood-lighting,
electric instrumentation, sound amplification, and video enhancement
that it would fall flat in a New York minute with no power. In my
church, thankfully, if the electricity went out, we would give one
another a quick glance and grin, and keep on singing or preaching. If
the electricity-dependent “worship” of the modern church lost
electricity, we would see quickly how much vast emptiness there is in
these churches, and in short-order, the churches would be vastly empty.
No show, no crowd. (Incidentally, I’m not a fan of the black-box
architecture of the missional-community church. This is a total
rejection of centuries of theologically-driven architectural principles
of church design that understood a theology of aesthetics.)
Rejecting manipulation, I won’t do a countdown video before the
service; it simply enhances the idea of a show that is about to begin. I
refuse to only allow the A-team to “perform.” I don’t want soft music
playing while I pray (or preach, or give an invitation). I don’t want
“smart lights” that set the mood, changeable at the push of a button to
fit the tone of the selected song. I don’t want to manipulate my
audience into a certain feeling which will evoke a certain action. Doing
so is sadly too easy, because our generation (as the Bible predicted)
loves the tickling of ears. If you tickle, they will come.
What I do want to provide is persuasion. I want to stand before the
congregation with a persuasive argument from Scripture. As a lawyer
before the jury, I want to present a water-tight case that will change
the thinking of those who have come to hear a Biblical message. I
realize that I do this in a day in which feeling trumps thinking, and so
my kind of persuasive preaching will often be rejected. Persuasive
preaching doesn’t have enough stories, illustrations, and “you can do
it” back-slapping grunts.
I refuse to let my congregation be deceived by good feelings
Thirdly, I reject the missional-community church-growth movement
because it is deceptive. Participants in these churches feel like they
are stalwart conservatives in a Bible-believing, Gospel-proclaiming,
Hell-reducing, Kingdom-expanding church. They consistently proclaim, “My
preacher really preaches the Bible.” True, their preacher does hold up a
Bible and talk about how true and authoritative it is. He even quotes
from the Bible fairly consistently
(“I know the plans I have for you…I will never leave you nor forsake you…I am come that you might have life more abundantly…(and, of course)
bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse”).
What these church members do not know is that they have adopted the
leftist agenda (socialism) or neo-con agenda (reconstructing a Christian
society) which is as empty as it has always been.
I will lose church-growth potential because I won’t allow a
good-feeling production to trump reality. Do my church members know
their Bible? Can they give a defense of the attacks against it? Can they
rightly divide the Word of Truth? Do they have a Biblical worldview
that understands creation (young-earth), eschatology (pre-trib),
salvation (Jesus as propitiatory sacrifice), grace (free from the Law),
and so much more? Have I developed a congregation that could, and would,
stick with it through a months-long study of the book of Numbers? Or
Leviticus? If I have not developed this kind of Biblical hunger, then
I’ve just allowed them to be deceived by thinking they’ve had Bible
study, experienced worship, and come away a better (and more
Christ-like) person. Since I will stand before God someday to be judged
for reality (not feelings), I will be satisfied to spend my time and
energy developing a Biblically-literate congregation.
I reject the church as a program organization over which I am the CEO
Finally, the CEO model of Pastor has to go. I know that almost every
missional-community church-growth model pastor’s conference says this
same thing, continually reminding pastors that they are not CEOs. Then,
having given the obligatory rejection of CEO style leadership, they tell
the Pastor that he should be known as the “Lead Pastor” (lead…short for
leadership, a key CEO trait). They instruct him in the best means of
vision development and “vision casting.” They Peter Drucker him to
spiritual death. They study the Bible, not looking for Biblical truth,
but looking for leadership traits of Moses (one of the worst leaders of
all time), Gideon (zero leadership capability), Nehemiah (who was not a
priest nor a pastor, but a government official), Jesus (who did nothing
but follow His Father), or Paul (who said pastors should “preach the
Word”).
Going further, these pastor’s conferences (or books) talk about all
the programs and paradigms the church could/should implement to develop
its missional-community. Of course, as soon as you create any kind of
ministry (i.e.
program) in the church, it requires some
oversight, which requires the Pastor to leave his pastoral function and
begin acting like the conference/book instructed him to act: like a
leader.
Don’t call me Lead Pastor. Don’t call me Senior Pastor (been there,
done that). Don’t call me Teaching Pastor (is there any other kind?).
Just call me Pastor, and let me devote my life to prayer and the
ministry of the Word, ministering to the flock under my care. I happen
to believe that if a person attends a church where they cannot call the
Pastor and talk to him, they don’t really have a Pastor.
Conclusion
I’ve just rejected everything that has become the favorite methods of
the missional-community church, which it uses as it bows down to its
idol called church-growth. I’m sure some have said “amen” all the
way through. If that was you, you’ve probably struggled to find a place
to worship and call your church home. Others have come to the end with a
righteous rage, wondering how I could so “not get it.” Whichever side
you are on, I encourage you to run to the Bible and use it as your only
source of revelation about the will of God in church, society, and your
own personal life.
- See more at: http://www.randywhiteministries.org/2014/01/02/leaving-church-growth-movement/#sthash.62JoFiZ2.dpuf