If you are interested in learning theological German because you want to get into Ph.D. programs or because you need to pass a Ph.D. program language exam, I have created a new website where all of the resources are in one place.
Theological German: The guide to quick competency
http://www.theologicalgerman.com/
Here is the term paper I wrote for my Theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer course with Stanley Hauerwas
It is entitled: "Bonhoeffer’s non-religious, concrete, worldly ecclesiology: Making sense of Letters and Papers from Prison in light of the rest of Bonhoeffer’s work"
I thought it was worth posting this after seeing R. O. Flyer's questions in his post The Shadow of Tegel Haunts Me which I try to address in the paper.
Download Bonhoeffer Ecclesiology Paper Word 2003
Download Bonhoeffer Ecclesiology Paper PDF
Amazon has been great to work with over the years. Shipping is fast. The system of ranking products is excellent. But now you have given the people who recommended you the shaft.
You gave us no options. You just shut us down because you don't want to pay taxes? Certainly there is a case for us to take legal action against you for abruptly canceling the program.
The website you refer us to http://www.
Sadly, this probably affects content mavens like me who recommend quality products. This was my only source of income from my website. A poor doctoral student just got poorer.
Andy Rowell
Letter of Complaint to North Carolina Legislators:
Find your representatives at: http://www.ncleg.net/GIS/RandR07/Representation.html#byZIP
|
We are writing from the Amazon Associates Program to notify you that
your Associates account has been closed as of June 26, 2009. This is a
direct result of the unconstitutional tax collection scheme expected to
be passed any day now by the North Carolina state legislature (the
General Assembly) and signed by the governor. As a result, we will no
longer pay any referral fees for customers referred to Amazon.com or
Endless.com after June 26. We were forced to take this unfortunate
action in anticipation of actual enactment because of uncertainties
surrounding the legislation’s effective date. Please be assured that all qualifying referral fees earned prior to June 26, 2009 will be processed and paid in full in accordance with our regular referral fee schedule. Based on your account closure date of June 26, 2009, any final payments will be paid by September 1, 2009. In the event that North Carolina repeals this tax collection scheme, we would certainly be happy to re-open our Associates program to North Carolina residents.
The North Carolina General Assembly’s website is
http://www.ncleg.net/, and additional information may be obtained from the Performance Marketing Alliance at http://www. We have enjoyed working with you and other North Carolina-based participants in the Amazon Associates Program, and wish you all the best in your future.
The Amazon Associates Team |
Message Category: Important Notice from the Amazon Associates Program
© 2009 Amazon.com. All rights reserved. Amazon.com is a registered trademark of Amazon.com, Inc. Amazon.com, 1200 12th Ave. S., Suite 1200, Seattle, WA 98144-2734, USA.
I have been using Twitter since August to write down micro-blog posts. I have tried to keep them around the theme of church leadership like my blog. Each “tweet” is only 140 characters. I try to provide something of value and not just tell you what I had for breakfast. Anyway, I just thought I would post the last 67 here so you can see what has been on my mind the last two months.
The most recent tweets (June 25) are at the top.
The Top Ten Ways to Ruin Young Pastors by my fellow Taylor University grad @jimvining http://bit.ly/15FbNn is very good. H/T TU's @jr_briggs 11:09 AM Jun 24th from web
Oct 7-9 http://www.catalystconferen... Oct 7-9 http://youngpastorsnetwork.org Oct 8-10 http://www.thefund.org/conf... 10:36 AM Jun 24th from bit.ly
I have revised my post: "How to Learn to Read Theological German" http://bit.ly/XYtaz 9:35 PM Jun 23rd from bit.ly
A very thorough obituary of Fuller Seminary theologian Ray S. Anderson (1925-2009) by Christian D. Kettler http://bit.ly/S3sCD 1:39 PM Jun 23rd from web. Additional note: Now Fuller also has an announcement: http://fuller.edu/news-and-events/news/anderson-passing.aspx
I posted more German translation practice from Barth's Church Dogmatics (§ 33, 47, 50, 59, Fragment). http://bit.ly/YzjGT 7:12 PM Jun 22nd from bit.ly
Dr. Ray Anderson, practical theologian at Fuller Theological Seminary, passed away yesterday. H/T @jasonclark @drjohnjackson 3:30 PM Jun 22nd from web
I have posted 2 pages of German from Barth's Church Dogmatics § 62 that I practiced translating, plus the Eng. trans. http://bit.ly/VtIkH 4:50 PM Jun 21st from bit.ly
Wonderful review by bookstore owner Byron Borger of "The Girl in the Orange Dress" by of our friend @MargotStarbuck http://bit.ly/5dlHX 1:44 PM Jun 21st from bit.ly
Audio MP3 from ICA event Slavoj Žižek with John Milbank http://bit.ly/lbXZ5 @PeterRollins @sivinkit H/T http://bit.ly/KzR5j 1:48 PM Jun 20th from bit.ly
I recommend Gran Torino named by @CTMovies #3 Most Redeeming Film of 2008 http://bit.ly/Jthst and #7 Critics' Choice http://bit.ly/CwohB 11:51 AM Jun 20th from bit.ly
RT @ahc Veritas Forum, producer of terrific programs at major universities, is hiring regional directors: http://bit.ly/10vgML 9:08 AM Jun 20th from web
RT @PeterRollins For a summary of the Zizek/Milbank exchange I was at, visit http://bit.ly/3wyxi7 9:05 AM Jun 20th from web
I posted my Learning the Craft of Pastoring: Six Practices for Cultivating Excellence in Pastoral Ministry term paper http://bit.ly/MoT4g 10:03 AM Jun 18th from bit.ly
RT @ERBks In other #Hauerwas related news, @ChristianBook has WITH THE GRAIN OF THE UNIVERSE for $0.99!! http://bit.ly/sflzI HT: @matthewjk 11:25 PM Jun 17th from web
I sent off my last paper. 12 out of 12 courses done for my doctoral program. Yeah! Now German, Spanish, prelim exams and dissertation.6:28 PM Jun 17th from web
Another important post today on my blog. Willow Creek's Reveal team begins suggesting principles of top churches http://bit.ly/M4RvL 4:14 PM Jun 16th from bit.ly
See my rather significant new blogpost: Fourteen theories of church growth from seven research teams http://bit.ly/TNOpq 2:58 PM Jun 16th from bit.ly
See @dooce for how the most popular mommy blogger http://dooce.com/ Heather Armstrong presents the birth of her second child on Twitter.9:07 AM Jun 16th from web
Chaves, "51% [of congregations], with 59% of participants, do not allow women to be full-fledged senior clergy." p. 16 http://bit.ly/8tU0v 8:51 AM Jun 15th from web
Mark Chaves, "Only 9% of congregations [in the U.S.] describe themselves as theologically liberal." p. 13 http://bit.ly/8tU0v 8:48 AM Jun 15th from web
65% of attenders of megachurches cite "senior pastor" as the most important factor that keeps them at the church. http://bit.ly/OFP61 p.18 8:44 AM Jun 15th from web
Wheaton's W. Jay Wood's CT review of Dallas Willard's book http://bit.ly/15Iayx and Wood's book Epistemology http://bit.ly/12Tmnp are great.11:06 AM Jun 13th from bit.ly
I think Benjamin Button could have been about grace in tragedy but the screenwriter thought it was "be yourself." http://bit.ly/167hze 1:41 PM Jun 11th from bit.ly
I suggested Eugene Peterson's book Take and Read for ideas about "What to read? Literature and ecclesiology" http://bit.ly/AT5Tv 10:15 AM Jun 11th from bit.ly
I revised my blog post: Two new reports: Thumma / Bird on Megachurches and Chaves on American Congregations http://bit.ly/wd3wo 1:13 PM Jun 10th from bit.ly
See http://bit.ly/Tbe4R for MP3s from http://advance09.com/ in Durham, NC last week with @pastorjdgreear @JohnPiper @edstetzer @PastorMark 8:51 AM Jun 9th from bit.ly
Son Ryan (4) notes that I look like Tim Keller and wonders whether Keller knows Madagascar zoo animals. See CT's http://tinyurl.com/otwy7v 7:23 PM Jun 8th from web
I commented again about how pastors might want to talk to the media at Prof. John Stackhouse’s Weblog http://bit.ly/WCQwP 3:42 PM Jun 8th from bit.ly
I commented that pastors usually don't want to talk to the media because they want to stick to the essentials in public. http://bit.ly/CewT3 12:30 PM Jun 8th from bit.ly
Dear God, help me to finish this paper today. It will never be perfect and I have got to move on. Amen. (And my wife Amy says, "AMEN!") 9:20 AM Jun 6th from web
In Christianity Today June issue, great work by Trevin Wax on Piper/Wright debate + Wood's review of Willard in my fav section TheCTReview.9:09 PM Jun 5th from web
New report: Mark Chaves - National Congregations Study "American Congregations at the Beginning of the 21st Century" PDF http://bit.ly/8tU0v 10:13 AM Jun 4th from bit.ly
God is most glorified in us when we are satisfied in him . . . while . . . on . . . Twitter @JohnPiper is tweeting. http://ow.ly/aPWv 5:27 PM Jun 3rd from web
Microsoft Word changes "pastoring" to "pasturing." Right click "Add to dictionary."12:06 PM Jun 3rd from web
Will discuss Alasdair MacIntyre's God, Philosophy, Universities (2009) http://bit.ly/SwLRu at July Ph.D./Th.D. Theology & Ethics colloquium11:31 AM Jun 3rd from bit.ly
I have now listed my top 14 favorite blogs at http://bit.ly/19yFRm 7:46 AM Jun 3rd from web
New blogpost: 60 Church Leadership Blogs and 140 Other Blogs I Subscribe To http://bit.ly/1Cf9C 5:40 PM Jun 2nd from bit.ly
Free audio download of the month. Christ Plays in Ten-Thousand Places by Eugene H. Peterson christianaudio.com http://bit.ly/eNuaE 11:03 PM Jun 1st from web
New post at my blog: I would welcome your advice on refining my draft outline for my Theology of Pastoral Ministry paper http://bit.ly/BUGND 10:52 PM Jun 1st from web
I'm going to Duke Divinity School to study and say hello to friends at Shaping the Beloved Community "Summer Institute" http://bit.ly/TCIhP 9:32 AM Jun 1st from web
Harvard Ph.D's in OT Peter Enns and Bruce Waltke interact re: tensions in the Bible. http://bit.ly/OC4xN I had Waltke at Regent College.9:01 AM Jun 1st from web
For Teenagers, Hello Means ‘How About a Hug?’ - NYTimes.com http://bit.ly/427f0A Apparently hugging is now cool.12:36 PM May 28th from bit.ly
I have posted my Bonhoeffer paper on my blog in case anyone wants to help me proofread it before I turn it in. http://bit.ly/RN4NR 2:34 AM May 28th from bit.ly
Must finish Bonhoeffer paper for Hauerwas today. Must write . . . must write . . . must write . . .10:25 AM May 27th from web
See post Silicon Alley Insider: The Twitter Founders' Favorite Tweets http://bit.ly/c38rQ for a few smiles.10:20 AM May 27th from bit.ly
I commented on Between Two Worlds: Bonhoeffer on the Difference Between the Counsel of Psychology and Christianity http://bit.ly/6F687 9:48 AM May 26th from bit.ly
Fascinating engagement with issues in OT scholarship in Duke prof Stephen Chapman's review of Kenton Sparks's book http://bit.ly/pqjWP 12:10 AM May 16th from web
No New Testament scholar embraces the label "New Perspective on Paul" or "traditional Lutheran"-everyone wants to draw insights from both.1:40 PM May 14th from web
A lot of theologians, in their zeal to see the church be more faithful to Jesus Christ, despair and throw church out with the bath water.1:21 PM May 14th from web
"The Visible Church-Community" chapter 11 in Discipleship is my new favorite piece by Bonhoeffer. If you want to love the church, read it.10:10 PM May 12th from web
I commented on both of Will Willimon's posts "Advice for New Pastors" Part 1 http://bit.ly/14KkIg and Part 2 http://bit.ly/UU5pS 3:06 PM May 12th from web
RT @ahc Michael Gerson summarizes Robert Putnam et al.'s upcoming book on American religion and community. Fascinating. http://bit.ly/7SrHg 12:38 PM May 11th from web
Kevin Vanhoozer moving from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School to Wheaton College. Great interview with him. http://bit.ly/10qrxE 12:26 PM May 11th from web
Of the 4 on Meet the Press with @davidgregory, I was most impressed with Afghanistan's Hamid Karzai. Opinions? Video: http://bit.ly/19QmEb 6:22 PM May 10th from web
Fun article by Malcolm Gladwell about how unexpected acts can topple big opponents (in Old Testament and basketball). http://bit.ly/eQyOU 12:54 AM May 10th from web
I've had to learn a lot about historical context of Barth and Bonhoeffer to understand their ecclesiologies. It was a complicated time.12:49 AM May 10th from web
Amazed that you can read chapters for free online through Google Books. Bonhoeffer on preaching in Lischer's book. http://bit.ly/SQgYU 10:42 PM May 9th from web
@cwillz Bonhoeffer wrote Discipleship in 1935-36 and Ethics in 1940-1943. March 1943 H. assassination attempts fail. In April, B. arrested.2:05 PM May 8th from web in reply to cwillz
Twitter no longer using Tinyurl but rather Bit.ly See http://bit.ly/vuX5j 9:44 PM May 7th from web
In Ethics, Bonhoeffer subtly describes why he thinks it is right to kill Hitler whereas some believe in Discipleship he is a total pacifist.9:31 PM May 7th from web
Reading (Cost of) Discipleship by Bonhoeffer again http://bit.ly/1HZUlo This time asking how this fits with Ethics. http://bit.ly/k9cOx 9:23 PM May 7th from web
I show you how to read Hauerwas on Hays free at http://bit.ly/11uSs5 2:39 PM May 7th from web
I commented on Duke Ph.D. and Fuller prof Daniel Kirk's post about Gorman, evangelicals, and the Bible. http://tinyurl.com/cwddru 2:22 PM May 7th from web
MacIntyre, "Aquinas summarizes the outcome of that [moral] enquiry so far, advances it one stage further, and leaves the way open" (TRV 74).10:04 PM May 5th from web
In tonight's Theology and Ethics Colloquium we talked about Aquinas. Many at Duke love Aquinas--not as a system but conversation partner.10:03 PM May 5th from web
New blogpost: My Th.D. program progress update http://tinyurl.com/cb5fok 1:33 AM May 4th from web
I have posted below the paper I wrote for a reading course I did with Ken Carder on the Theology of Pastoral Ministry based on his two courses in which I was his teaching assistant.
See Ken Carder: Introduction to Christian Ministry books (Fall 2008)
and Ken Carder's course The Local Church in Mission to God's World books (Spring 2009)
I had asked for feedback June 1 on which direction to go: Would welcome your advice on my Theology of Pastoral Ministry paper
I wrote it June 1-17, 2009.
It is 51 pages and 18,000 words. With the 2 appendixes and bibliography it is 65 pages and 22,000 words.
This was my 12th and last course to finish for the Th.D. (Doctor of Theology) program at Duke Divinity School. Yeah!
In some ways, this represents a synthesis of many of the things I have learned thus far in the Th.D. program. Someday some of this will be a book but I have lots of other things to work on right now: pass my German and Spanish language exams, then do preliminary exams, then dissertation proposal and then dissertation. See My Th.D. program progress update The book will have to wait.
So on the one hand, I feel like this is good stuff that could help people. On the other hand, this is a paper I wrote in about two weeks and it could use lots of refining and editing. Because the topic--what is pastoral ministry about--is so gigantic, I treat all of the issues and theologians in eclectic fashion--sampling a bit here and a bit there. It is much more responsible scholarship to dig deep into one thinker like I have done in most my previous term papers: The Ecclesiology of John Howard Yoder paper and The Missional Ecclesiology of Rowan Williams, both of which I posted; and a number of papers I haven't posted: missional ecclesial practices in Apostle Paul, the ecclesiology of Matthew and Paul compared, Dietrich Bonhoeffer's ecclesiology, church and world in Alasdair MacIntyre and Nathan Kerr, ecclesiology of Miroslav Volf, and preaching in Karl Barth. In this paper, I consciously and unconsciously draw on a lot of that but try to put something forward more constructive.
As always, I am happy to receive feedback in the comments (or by email). I will take it into account as my views continue to evolve. There is much I still need to learn.
Here is the paper:
Download Theology of Pastoral Ministry Paper Word 2003
Download Theology of Pastoral Ministry Paper PDF
I have pasted below the table of contents and introduction.
Duke Divinity School
Learning the Craft of Pastoring:
Six Practices for Cultivating Excellence in Pastoral Ministry
submitted to
Ken Carder in partial fulfillment of
CHURCMIN 399: THEOLOGY OF PASTORAL MINISTRY
by
Andy Rowell
June 17, 2009
Contents
|
Introduction: Why we need to understand pastoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
1 |
|
The six practices that form the craft of pastoring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
4 |
|
1. Becoming a neighbor to the suffering: learning about human suffering from artists, social-scientists and the sufferer . . . . . . |
7 |
|
2. Becoming a master pastor observer: learning about different styles of pastoring from sociology, historical exemplars, fictional and real life exemplars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
16 |
|
3. Becoming a student of the body of Christ: learning about the function of the church leader in the New Testament. . . . . . . . . . . . |
23 |
|
4. Becoming an equipper for holy living: learning about the marks of the church from historical theology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
36 |
|
5. Becoming a believer in the missionary nature of the church: learning about the church’s purpose through biblical theology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
41 |
|
6. Becoming a lover of the missionary God: learning about the triune god from prayer, Scripture, and systematic theology. . . |
45 |
|
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
50 |
|
Appendix A: Bonhoeffer and Barth both moving toward the center from the realist and idealist poles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
52 |
|
Appendix B: The discipline of “practical theology” is also attempting to do this integrative work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
56 |
|
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
59 |
Introduction: Why we need to understand pastoring
Is pastoral ministry a troubled profession, perhaps even one in crisis? Or is the profession a deeply satisfying calling to which it is worth giving one’s life? Jackson Carroll, who oversaw a national recent survey of pastors, concludes,
Most of America’s pastoral leaders—represented by the sample that we surveyed—are deeply committed to their calling to ordained ministry. If they consider a change, it is more likely that they would pursue their call in another church-related occupation rather than dropping out. They are likewise generally satisfied with most aspect of their work. In short, they echo Eugene Peterson’s comment with which we opened this chapter.[1]
Peterson reflects,
I’ve loved being a pastor, almost every minute of it. It’s a difficult life because it’s a demanding life. But the rewards are enormous—the rewards of being on the front line of seeing the gospel worked out in people’s lives. I remain convinced that if you are called to it, being a pastor is the best life there is. But any life can be the best life if you're called to it.[2]
Pastoring is difficult but for many pastors it is deeply rewarding.
But of course there is more to pastoring than finding job satisfaction. We also want God to be satisfied with what we are doing. Perhaps we are most aware of this while trying to communicate God’s Word to the people of God. Karl Barth felt this keenly as a pastor and as a theologian. At age 28, on September 4, 1914, he wrote to his friend and fellow pastor 26-year-old Eduard Thurneysen,
Here are two sermons from me; they are simply the last two. You will look at them not as though they were finished products but only as experiments. We are really all of us experimenting now, each in his own way and every Sunday in a different way, in order to become to some degree masters of the limitless problem.[3]
If preaching is a limitless problem—trying to convey the God of the universe to a sinful and holy group of human beings in twenty minutes, then the pastoral task as a whole is even more overwhelming. If we just had to deliver one sermon a week, that would be difficult, but pastoral ministry has never been characterized as simply that.
The 24 or 30 course sequence in the Masters of Divinity (M.Div.) degree attempts to cover the necessary ground but students often have difficulty seeing how it all fits together to form a holistic pastoral ministry. “Why do I need to know this?” is not just asked in junior high math classes.
After entering the pastorate, many new pastors are overwhelmed by the tidal wave of demands and discouraged that their own expectations seem so frequently thwarted by bureaucracy, tradition—in short, other people. Their questions are often desperate, “How do I sort through the chaos to find what is most important? How do I know if I am doing a good job?”
Eventually pastors, if they hang in there, settle into a routine. This is of course a relief compared to the chaos of the first year in ministry. But Will Willimon worries that it is often then that settling into a routine turns into complacency and mediocrity.
In a small, rural church, alone, with total responsibility in your shoulders, in the weekly treadmill of sermons and pastoral care, if you are not careful there is too little time to read and reflect, too little time to prepare your first sermons, so you develop bad habits of flying by the seat of your pants, taking short cuts, and borrowing from others what ought to be developed in the workshop of your own soul. Ministry has a way of coming at you, of jerking you around from here to there, so you need to take charge of your time, prioritize your work, and be sure that you don’t neglect the absolute essentials while you are doing the merely important. If you don’t define your ministry on the basis of your theological commitments, the parish has a way of defining your ministry on the basis of their selfish preoccupations and that is why so many clergy are so harried and tired today. Mind your habits.[4]
Wanting to continue to grow in skill and wisdom, pastors are increasingly returning to school in Doctor of Ministry (D.Min.) programs which shore up one aspect of pastoring. But without a broader framework, these programs may simply ossify pastors in their ways. I often hear pastors say, “I’m a preacher, not an administrator.” Their D.Min.degree in preaching reinforces their desire to focus on just one aspect of pastoring. Meanwhile that pastor’s congregation needs a leader willing to learn enough about administration and care for the poor so that they can at least delegate and oversee those areas adequately. Their congregation members complain that even in meetings, “the pastor is in preaching mode” or “using their preacher’s voice.” Meanwhile, the pastor’s preaching is becoming increasingly ineffective as they see it as their primary focus.
Similar negative consequences result when pastors conclude, “I’m a pioneer, not a maintainer” or “I’m an evangelist, not a theologian.” A string of broken congregations often lie in the wake of this “self-aware” pastor who trumpets, “I know what I’m good at and I know what I’m not.” Admitting that I am only one part of the body of Christ is indeed important but this realization should inspire me to appreciate and learn from the other parts of the body. Fascinatingly, Paul does not say, “Once a foot, always a foot.” Rather, he encourages mobility and growth. “Now eagerly desire the greater gifts” (1 Cor 12:31). Yes, “we have different gifts” (Rom 12:6) and we are to exercise them diligently (Rom 12:8), but there are no biblical grounds for specialization in one area and total neglect in the rest.
I argue in this paper that pastoring consists of six areas. The pastor seeking excellence ought to cultivate their abilities in all six areas. Pastors never arrive at excellence. The church is a sign, instrument, foretaste, and herald of the reign of God. We point, we never arrive. We become better signs, instruments, forestastes, and heralds. We grow closer to excellence but pastoring is an art, a craft—consisting of a series of demanding practices. We can never cease learning.
But a comforting thought is that we can do it with others. We can learn with and from others.
And an even more comforting thought is that we do this work with God. The church is God’s idea. The Spirit of God empowers the work. One can never get over the stunning designation—the church is the body of Christ.
Seminarian, take heart. New pastor, press on. Veteran pastor, continue to sharpen up. These are the six practices of our work.
[1] Jackson W. Carroll, God’s Potters: Pastoral Leadership and the Shaping of Congregations (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006), 185.
[2] Carroll, God’s Potters, 159. David Wood, “Eugene Peterson on Pastoral Ministry” ChrCent 119, no. 6 (March 13-20, 2002): 18. Cf. 18-25.
[3] Karl Barth and Eduard Thurneysen, Revolutionary Theology in the Making: Barth-Thurneysen Correspondence, 1914-1925 (trans. James D. Smart; Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1964), 26.
[4] William H. Willimon, “Between Two Worlds” in From Midterms to Ministry: Practical Theologians on Pastoral Beginnings (ed. Allan Hugh Cole; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 284. Cf. 274-286.
Willow Creek's Reveal research has begun to produce some helpful new findings. The article "The Open Secrets About Deep Spiritual Growth" by Cally Parkinson, coauthor of Reveal and Follow Me, represents a new direction in the Reveal research. The article appears May/June issue of Rev! magazine (pp. 48-52)--not available online.
I have been somewhat critical of Willow Creek's Reveal project in the past (See my Willow Creek REVEAL's second book Follow Me tells us very little) because I like Willow Creek and I thought the research and interpretation of the data was being done poorly. These mistakes were compounded by communication errors: exaggerated claims, multiple spokespeople, and defensiveness.
But this latest article is in much more solid territory--suggesting that a certain group of churches are better than others with regard to certain criteria and then trying to discern what makes those churches great. This is the way most studies are done: "Here are what we think are great examples--what do they have in common?" for example, Jim Collins's Good to Great book or the books I cite in my post Fourteen theories of church growth from seven research teams.
Parkinson's article focuses on what the Reveal staff perceive to be some of the common traits among the churches who score in the top 5% in "spiritual vitality score" of the 675 churches they have surveyed. They do not tell us exactly how they calculate the "spiritual vitality score" but they tell us the factors that this score takes into account.
That seems ok with me but if we knew more about these factors and how they are weighed, we might want to quibble with what factors they are emphasizing, how the questions were worded, etc. We might also wonder whether the "principles" below are actually the factors that make up the "spiritual vitality score" but since we don't know that, we have to move on.
Parkinson lists four principles that the these top-5%-spiritual-vitality-score churches have in common.
This also sounds ok to me--given the lack of information. The Reveal researchers have suggested four factors that seem to correlate with a high "spiritual vitality score." But as I have shown in my post, Fourteen theories of church growth from seven research teams different researchers can come to very different conclusions about what seems to be the most significant factor in producing certain outcomes even if they are agreed on the outcome--in that case "attendance growth." The more information Reveal's staff releases about how they come to their conclusions, the happier I am. Quantitative research in the social sciences is just too difficult to do--we need input from others--often called peer review.
You will be happy to learn that the article names 15 churches that are in the top 5%--giving their name, location, website, senior pastor's name, denomination, suburban/rural/urban designation and weekend adult attendance. This is wonderful and I will explain why below.
Still, though 5% X 675 = 34 Thus, the Reveal researchers have only made public 15 of the 34 churches that made it into their top 5%. There are 19 churches that made it into their top 5% that we don't know about. But it is still great they told us this much.
Because they have listed 15 churches that constitute some of the top 5% of the churches they have researched, outside researchers can now begin to make their own conclusions about what these 15 churches have in common that the Reveal researchers perhaps did not notice. For example, in looking at the results, I am wondering if congregations with enthusiastic worship environments may have contributed to rather enthusiastic survey results. (For a technical description of enthusiastic church traditions, see chapter 5 Worship, especially p. 147 (Google Books link) of Mark Chaves, Congregations in America, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004). If you attend a church that is upbeat all of the time, perhaps you too would tend to respond in an upbeat way about your church on a survey. But maybe I'm wrong about that. But the great thing about listing the 15 churches is that I can at least brainstorm what other factors might be causing a high "spiritual vitality score" besides the ones that the Reveal researchers noticed.
As I always say, I am all for evaluation and surveys, we just need to know it is tricky stuff. Furthermore, I don't have a dog in this fight--I love churches. Small and large, seeker-sensitive, emerging, traditional, rural, urban and suburban churches--I am for them. I'll let Lesslie Newbigin say that in his own way.
The Church is a sign, instrument, and foretaste of God’s reign for that ‘place,’ that segment of the total fabric of humanity, for which it is responsible--a sign, instrument and foretaste for that place with its particular culture.[1]
[1] Lesslie Newbigin, Household of God: Lectures on the Nature of the Church (1953) in Lesslie Newbigin: Missionary Theologian: A Reader (ed. Paul Weston; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2006), 138.
For more on sociology, see my category Sociology.
Between 2001 and 2009, seven different teams of national researchers have used quantitative data to suggest 14 different factors that correlate with church growth.
I looked at work from seven researcher teams: Stark, Hout/Greeley/Wilde, Woolever/Bruce, Stetzer/Dodson, Olson, Chaves, and Thumma.
Here is a summary of the 14 factors which I document fully below: (1) witnessing, (2) strictness, (3) high fertility rates, (4) caring for children and youth, (5) high involvement, (6) welcoming new people, (7) leadership, (8) prayer, (9) being a church of 1000+ attendees or under 50 attendees, (10) being located in rural counties, (11) being in rapidly growing zip codes, (12) being in a tradition that is altering worship practices slightly but not too much, (13) churches that offer “intimacy and choice” and (14) attractive worship style, senior pastor, and church reputation.
It is clear that the causative factor in church growth is in dispute.
Researchers should consider these theories as they design studies and interpret data.
Pastors should realize that a consensus has not been achieved and thus caution should be exercised when one researcher claims to have found the cause of church growth.
The 14 factors that researchers claim correlate with church growth
1. Witnessing
Rodney Stark suggests that fervent witnessing and strict beliefs are the key factors.
He writes, “Why do conservative churches outperform the liberals? Because they work much harder at attracting and holding members. How do they do that? By inspiring their members to witness to others.”[1]
2. Strictness
Stark goes on to say,
For many observers of the American religious scene, especially Europeans, the real mystery is why the strict churches—those who demand the most of their members—are the ones that are flourishing, while the more permissive and accommodating churches are falling by the wayside . . . The findings in this chapter can be summed up in a sentence: strict churches are strong because groups that ask more from their members get more from them, which provides them with the resources to provide a more satisfying religious ‘product.’[2]
3. High fertility rates
Some recent research by Michael Hout, Andrew Greeley, and Melissa Wilde suggests that high fertility rates are really the main factor contributing to growth.
U.S. Protestants are less likely to belong to "mainline" denominations and more likely to belong to “conservative” ones than used to be the case. Evidence from the General Social Survey indicates that higher fertility and earlier childbearing among women from conservative denominations explains 76% of the observed trend for cohorts born between 1903 and 1973: conservative denominations have grown their own. Mainline decline would have slowed in recent cohorts, but a drop-off in conversions from conservative to mainline denominations prolonged the decline. A recent rise in apostasy added a few percentage points to mainline decline. Conversions from main- line to conservative denominations have not changed, so they played no role in the restructuring.[3]
4. Caring for children and youth
5. High involvement
6. Welcoming new people
Cynthia Woolever and Deborah Bruce suggest that “Three congregational strengths are positive predictors of numerical growth: Caring for Children and Youth, Participating in the Congregation [including giving rates], and Welcoming New People.”[4] However, they also note: “Other factors don't predict growth — denomination or faith group, congregational size, income levels of worshipers, average age of worshipers, and population growth around the church.”[5]—conflicting with some other theories. They also note:
Many new people (47%) visit for the first time because someone invited them; only 6% came for the first time due to advertising . . . People return because of the quality of the sermon (36%), the friendliness of the people (32%), and the overall worship experience (30%) . . . Growing congregations are more likely to hold events to meet new people or to add members, advertise in the newspaper or telephone book, use email, have a church Web site, and send materials to or telephone first-time visitors . . . Services in growing congregations are more likely to include contemporary music and laughter.[6]
7. Leadership
Ed Stetzer and Mike Dodson report that “we let the data set the agenda, and godly leadership was at the top.”[7]
8. Prayer
Stetzer and Dodson go on to suggest that “Prayer, Children’s Ministry, Evangelism, Youth Ministry, and Leadership” were the top five areas that were changed in the growing churches they studied.[8]
9. Being a church of 1000+ attendees or under 50 attendees
David Olson points out that large (1000+ attendance) and small churches (1-49 attendance) are growing at the fastest rates. “While the larger churches grew according to expectation, the smallest churches actually grew at a faster yearly rate. The churches that declined the most were those with a weekly attendance between 100 and 299.”[9]
Confirming this findings from another angle, Olson reports that in the fourteen diverse denominations he studied, all the denominations that were growing were planting lots of churches; specifically all those denominations planting at least one new church per year for every one hundred existing churches continued to grow.[10]
Mark Chaves affirms the movement of people into large churches.
In every denomination on which we have data, people are increasingly concentrated in the very largest churches, and this is true for small and large denominations, for conservative and liberal denominations, for growing and declining denominations. This trend began rather abruptly in the 1970s, with no sign of tapering off.[11]
10. Being located in rural counties
Olson points out from his research that “Growing churches were more likely to be rural and less likely to be small town, suburban, or urban. While the common assumption is that rural churches are under the most stress, the research supports the opposite.”[12] Thumma and Travis similarly notes that “We are now seeing a rapid rise in the number of churches reaching megachurch proportions that are located in more exurban, formerly rural counties.”[13]
11. Being in rapidly growing zip codes
Olson also points out that growing population areas tend to have growing churches.
Only one [other] external factor was significant in the growth or decline of the church—the change in the population of its zip code. Fast-growing churches—those that increased by more than 20 percent in attendance—were more likely to be located in zip codes where the population growth was higher than the national average. If a church declined or was stable, it was more likely located in a low-growth zip code where population growth was lower than the national average.[14]
12. Being in a tradition that is altering worship practices slightly but not too much
Chaves hypothesizes the development of denominational traditions through “an ecological interpretation of denominational variation.”[15] He argues that denominations have developed from one another in terms of worship practices. New religious traditions (like the Pentecostal tradition) “position themselves relative to already existing groups such that their worship is different, but not too different, from prevailing worship practice.”[16] Chaves is just doing descriptive work but it is hard not to make the connections between this movement and the charts about denominational winners and losers in other books. He also tacitly acknowledges this, “It is remarkable that newer religious traditions tend to appear . . . less ceremonial and more enthusiastic . . . than older religious traditions. No major religious movement has successfully moved” the other direction.[17] It seems that this type of gradual variation “change that occurs through relatively small alterations in existing practice” toward more enthusiasm and less ceremony is a factor in growth.[18]
13. Churches that offer “intimacy and choice.”
Scott Thumma argues that “niche” house churches and megachurches both are offering individuals a product they are interested in. “In certain ways, the megachurch is the complete opposite of the house church, but with hundreds of ministries, programs, and fellowship groups, it offers intimacy and choice in one package.”[19]
14. Attractive worship style, senior pastor, and church reputation
Thumma’s latest report about megachurches notes that people report being attracted to the megachurch for three main reasons: worship style, senior pastor and church reputation.
The worship style, senior pastor and reputation of the church were most strongly influential in initially bringing people into the megachurches. . . Clearly, most people coming to a megachurch need a direct personal contact with someone they know but it is the public image and their first impression of the church (shaped by the worship style, the personality and quality of the senior pastor and the church’s reputation) that potential, permanent participants find most appealing . . . those characteristics that are most influential for keeping the largest percentage of attenders are indeed the same three items that initially attracted them to the church – the senior pastor, worship style and church reputation.[20]
[1] Rodney Stark, What Americans Really Believe: New Findings from the Baylor Surveys of Religion (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2008), 25.
[2] Stark, What Americans Believe, 29.
[3] Mark Chaves, Congregations in America (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004), 33. Michael Hout, Andrew Greeley, Melissa J. Wilde, “The Demographic Imperative in Religious Change in the United States,” The American Journal of Sociology, 107: 2 (Sep 2001): 468-500.
[4] Cynthia Woolever and Deborah Bruce, Beyond the Ordinary: 10 Strengths of U.S. Congregations (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004), 113.
[5] Cynthia Woolever and Deborah Bruce, “Myths and Facts about Evangelism and Church Growth,” U.S. Congregations website, n.p. [cited 8 December 2008]. Online: http://uscongregations.org/growth.htm
[6] Woolever and Bruce, “Myths and Facts.”
[7] Ed Stetzer and Mike Dodson, Comeback Churches: How 300 Churches Turned Around and Yours Can Too (Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2007), 34.
[8] Stetzer and Dodson, Comeback Churches, 193.
[9] David T. Olson, The American Church in Crisis: Groundbreaking Research Based on a National Database of over 200,000 Churches (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), 86.
[10] Olson, American Church in Crisis, 146.
[11] Mark Chaves, “All Creatures Great and Small: Megachurches in Context,” Review of Religious Research 47 (2006): 329.
[12] Olson, American Church in Crisis, 132-133.
[13] Scott Thumma and Dave Travis, Beyond Megachurch Myths: What We Can Learn from America’s Largest Churches (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2007), 26.
[14] Olson, American Church in Crisis, 132-133.
[15] Chaves, Congregations, 155.
[16] Chaves, Congregations, 152.
[17] Chaves, Congregations, 157.
[18] Chaves, Congregations, 156.
[19] Scott Thumma, “The Shape of Things to Come,” in Faith in America: Changes, Challenges, New Directions (ed. Charles H. Lippy; Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2006), 194.
[20] Scott Thumma and Warren Bird, “Not Who You Think They Are: The Real Story of People Who Attend America’s Megachurches” The National Survey of Megachurch Attenders report (June 2009), Hartford Institute for Religious Research website, n.p. [cited 16 June 2009], 15. Online: http://hirr.hartsem.edu/megachurch/National%20Survey%20of%20Megachurch%20Attenders%20-final.pdf
Notes:
This was an appendix for a paper for Mark Chaves during the fall of 2008.
Citation:
Andy Rowell, “Fourteen theories of church growth from seven research teams” Church Leadership Conversations blog (June 16, 2009), n.p. [cited 16 June 2009]. Online: http://www.andyrowell.net/andy_rowell/2009/06/fourteen-theories-of-church-growth-from-seven-research-teams.html
There are at least four reasons why the theories differ.
(a) It is difficult to find just one correct hypothesis to account for church growth.
(b) Many of the the researchers do not explicitly intend for church leaders to “try these things out in your churches” though church leaders often jump to this conclusion.
(c) Even with proven trends, there are almost always exceptions.
(d) The details of the social science deserve scrutiny.
See the outline of my unpublished essay “Eight Warnings for Church Leaders about Using Sociologist Data" in my post Two new reports: Thumma / Bird on Megachurches and Chaves on American Congregations
For more sociology regarding churches, see my Sociology category.
Update:
I have not yet looked at
FACTs: A new look at the dynamics of growth and decline in American congregations based on the Faith Communities Today 2005 national survey of congregations
C. Kirk Hadaway
on Growth: A Publication of Faith Communities Today and CCSP
Below I have highlighted two important new reports on the church by premier academic sociologists. At the end I have listed a few things to keep in mind while interpreting statistics.
The National Survey of Megachurch Attenders report "Not Who You Think They Are: The Real Story of People Who Attend America’s Megachurches" by Scott Thumma and Warren Bird
This 40-page PDF was just released. It is an outstanding example of good research and clear writing.
Thumma wrote with Dave Travis the excellent book Beyond Megachurch Myths: What We Can Learn from America's Largest Churches (J-B Leadership Network Series) (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2007). Thumma and Bird work for Hartford Institute of Religious Research and Leadership Network respectively. Thumma has done more research on megachurches than anyone else.
Probably the biggest difference between megachurches and other churches that they highlight is that "Megachurch attenders are younger and more of them are single . . . Additionally, they are more educated and wealthier" (Not Who You Think They Are, p. 28). There are positive and negative ways of interpreting this. The megachurch supporter could say, "Megachurches are doing something right! They are attracting more youth, single, educated and wealthy people." The megachurch critic could say, "The megachurch unfortunately probably makes old, married, uneducated, and poor people feel unwelcome."
The findings will be particularly valuable when critics and defenders of the megachurch declare their personal experiences and opinions as statistical facts.
This played out in a series of conversations at Leadership Journal's Out of Ur blog and on lots of blogs in December 2008. During this time, I wrote two posts at Out of Ur:
Megachurch Misinformation Mega or missional? The stats say both are doing well. by Andy Rowell
and
(I tried to chronicle all the discussions at:
Following Dan Kimball's Missional vs. Megachurch conversation)
I would encourage the reader of the National Survey of Megachurch Attenders report to note all of the things that megachurches and churches have in common. There are many common problems that we all need to work on. For example, Thumma and Bird note, "The Longer People Attend, the Less Likely They Are to Report 'Much Growth' in Their Faith" (p. 27). Why is that? There are a number of ways of interpreting that. In my opinion, this report is what people hoped they might be able to learn from the Willow Creek Reveal and Follow Me reports but unfortunately without sociological expertise and in conjunction with bungled communication, the Reveal reports ended up causing more confusion than anything else. (I like Willow Creek but think they made some missteps with the Reveal endeavor--I was frustrated because it made them look worse than they are! See my Willow Creek REVEAL's second book Follow Me tells us very little).
This Thumma / Bird report does not however take a "and this is what we should do about this" approach. That is up to us in church leadership.
The National Congregations Study report "American Congregations at the Beginning of the 21st Century" by Mark Chaves
This 40-page PDF also came out this week. In my opinion, Duke sociologist Chaves is the most important sociologist of congregations in the United States. He is author of Congregations in America (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004), overseas the National Congregations Study, and regularly writes at the Call & Response blog at the Faith & Leadership website.
Here is the summary of findings from page 2.
"This report highlights some of the National Congregations Study’s most important findings, including:
The issue that I have referred to repeatedly from Chaves's work is the finding the report begins with. (For example, see my post How to Read Hybels: Book Review of Axiom by Bill Hybels). It is so important!
• In both 1998 and 2006-07, the average congregation had just 75 regular participants.
• In both 1998 and 2006-07, the average attendee worshiped in a congregation with about 400 regular participants. (American Congregations at the Beginning of the 21st Century, p. 2. See p. 3 for the explanation of this statistic).
Here is only one of the fascinating implications of this concept.
I only have one small quibble with this statistic and I will share it to show the difficulty of interpreting data. I wish Chaves would have given us the statistics on "weekly attendance" (which the National Congregation Study has also gathered) rather than "regular participants." It seems to me this is a more accurate way of describing the size of a church than what number the pastor deems are "regular participants."
Here are the two questions. I like the second question better because it seems less susceptible to bias.
I did the calculations at the National Congregations Study website. 56% of congregations report having less than 100 "regular attendees including children." But just 38% of congregations report having less than 100 in "Total attendance for ALL services last weekend." Apparently, a number of pastors estimated that of the people attending last Sunday, only a smaller percentage are "regular participants" saying something like, "Yes, we had over 125 people in attendance last Sunday but I would only consider 75 to be 'regular participants.'" It seems to me all of the other sociological research on congregations deals with attendance because this notion of "regular participants" is too subjective. The pastor who perhaps attracts a large attendance but conscientiously reports a lower number of "regular participants" looks to be ministering to a smaller number of people than he or she really is. (I of course may be missing something here in my statistical analysis but I think I am right about this).
The question of what is more important "membership" (described here in NCS as "regular participants") vs. "attendance" is not new. For example, the United Methodist Church gives "Average Worship Attendance" while The Presbyterian Church (USA) emphasizes membership statistics (though you can also find attendance statistics). Sometimes, in the PC(USA) the membership exceeds the number who attend each week. Other times, it is the opposite. For example, "Your congregation's reported total membership, 548, was larger than the 2007 PC(USA) average, 205. . . . Your congregation's reported worship attendance, 456, was larger than the 2007 PC(USA) average, 114." Like I said, I think the people who actually show up is the more important number. ( . . . and my Presbyterian friends mutter about Andy's anabaptist ecclesial instincts . . . but I digress).
Eight Warnings for Church Leaders about Using Sociologist Data by Andy Rowell
All of this information in these reports should be used by the church leader judiciously.
For my course for Mark Chaves last fall, I wrote my term paper on how pastors should use sociological data. (Someday I'd like to publish it--any ideas where?)
I will post below the outline for church leaders and consumers of statistics to keep in mind.
Warning 1: Theological convictions should determine what gets measured. Consider measuring both quantity and quality.
Warning 2: Statistics are descriptive not prescriptive.
Warning 3: Correlation does not mean causation.
Warning 4: It is very difficult to determine the most important causative factor—the right hypothesis—and without it, there will be failed expectations.
Warning 5: There are always exceptions.
Warning 6: Good social science is very difficult and all of it needs significant peer review.
Warning 7: Statistics should also be gathered from outsiders.
Warning 8: Businesses and other organizations are not necessarily more effective organizations than churches.
See also
Evangelicals Behaving Badly with Statistics
Mistakes were made.
Christian Smith | posted 1/01/2007
See my categories Megachurches and Sociology for more on these topics.
Or see my topic Ecclesiology for more theological reflection on the church in which I always try to stay cognizant of the sociological data.
Update June 15, 2009.
Three stats I have been thinking about a lot so I tweeted about them. http://twitter.com/AndyRowell
