Steve Murrell is the senior pastor of Victory Metro in Manila, Philippines; a director of the Real Life Foundation; and the cofounder and president of Every Nation, a worldwide family of churches and ministries. Victory Metro Manila meets in thirteen different locations and has planted churches in forty other Philippine cities and a dozen nations. The Real Life Foundation is a social and educational advocacy organization that exists to serve the poor and improve their lives through educational assistance, character development, and community service. Steve is the author of The Reluctant Leader, and is a regular contributor to Evangelicals Today, a monthly Philippine publication.

His new book, WikiChurch: Making Discipleship Engaging, Empowering, and Viral is out, and I wanted to chat with him about it and what he wants the church to learn from it.

Steve, let's start at the beginning. What is a 'WikiChurch'?

The "wiki" part of Wikipedia is from a Hawaiian word meaning "quick," as Wikipedia's format allows for the quick and widespread dissemination of information online. While it may be an imperfect source, Wikipedia has made information widely available by simply empowering volunteers. However, it did not begin this way. In 2000 Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger started an online encyclopedia called Nupedia whose contributions were written solely by experts. Before an article could be posted, it had to go through an extensive scholarly review process. When Nupedia unplugged its servers in 2003, only twenty-four articles had been posted, with seventy-four still in the review process. In 2001, one year after Nupedia launched, Wales and Sanger started Wikipedia as a feeder system for Nupedia. The idea was to allow non-experts to write articles that the Nupedia scholars would review. By the end of the year, volunteers had submitted more than twenty thousand "wiki" articles. At the time of this writing, contributors from around the world have submitted more than nineteen million Wikipedia articles, and according to an independent survey, most are as accurate as traditional encyclopedia entries. Unfortunately, many churches today function more like Nupedia than Wikipedia. They allow only credentialed professionals to lead evangelism and discipleship efforts while volunteers are expected to show up and pay up but not engage in serious ministry. Imagine if the church functioned more like Wikipedia. Imagine if every believer, not just paid leaders, were empowered to minister. That's a Wiki Church.

In your book, you talk about Victory-Manila, a church you and your wife planted in 1984 which began with 165 university students and has grown to over 52,000 members. Tell us about that journey and what it looked like as you became a "Wikichurch."

Since 1984, all our efforts, all our mistakes, and all our successes have been in pursuit of figuring out how to make disciples. We became a WikiChurch not by bouncing from revival to revival or from strategy to strategy but by making Jesus' last command our first priority. We have found that if we simply focus on making disciples who are equipped and empowered to make other disciples, then health, strength, and growth happen naturally. Though we are still evaluating, refining, and constantly rewriting our discipleship materials, the underlying principles of the disciple-making process at Victory are firmly fixed. For twenty-seven years, we've sought to compassionately engage our communities, intentionally establish biblical foundations, strategically equip believers, and continually empower disciples. Just the same ole boring strokes year after year: engage, establish, equip, and empower.

The church talks a lot about discipleship, but you identify several 'discipleship myths' which hinder the church's call to make disciples. Talk to us about a few and why are they so problematic.

There are a few popular discipleship myths that have been propagated by thousands of well-meaning pastors and professional religious leaders. One is the Myth of Mentoring--that my pastor's job is to minister to me. This myth causes church people to demand that pastors spoon-feed them, care for them, and meet all their spiritual needs. It turns pastors into spiritual superheroes and regular Christians into passive spectators at religious shows. Another myth is the Myth of Maturity--that no one should minister until they are mature. This myth convinces people they don't pray enough, don't know enough Bible verses, and are too young to engage in ministry--leading Christians to believe that only after another discipleship course or leadership seminar or seminary degree would they possibly be mature enough to be used by God. The sum effect of these myths is an ineffective church with overworked ministers, overfed members, and unengaged communities.

You argue that a WikiChurch is a multigenerational church." What has been your greatest challenge in trying to build multigenerational churches?

Every church, denomination, and missionary organization faces the challenge of what to do with the next generation. Many embrace the traditional "pass the baton" analogy where one generation has the baton and runs the race, while the next generation watches and waits for their turn. However, the challenge is learning how to empower and lead together with the next generation--to run the race together. We need to involve emerging leaders now because if we do not empower the next generation, we will lose them. Leading together is difficult because they are not like us--they think differently, problem solve differently, and apply their faith to social needs in new ways. However, I've found that they usually understand and engage their culture much better than I do. Therefore, it is crucial for established leaders to make room at the table for emerging leaders, learning how to make constant adjustments and improvements while maintaining a deep commitment to a common vision.

What should pastors and leaders NOT take away from reading your book?

Do not copy our church. On numerous occasions I have had people from the United States approach me to deliver their happy news--that they are doing small group discipleship in their church exactly the way we do it in the Philippines. Instead of the expected congratulations and a pat on the back, my typical response is, "Why in the world would you do that?" I live in a city of twelve million people. Most of them live in poverty, very few have cars, and the religious and family structures are totally different from that in the West. The world you live in is totally different from Manila. Why would you copy us? Developing your own strategy for making disciples takes time, prayer, and some trial and error--just as it did with us. We can learn from one another, just as the Victory team is continuing to learn from other churches around the world, but only after we contextualize to make sure the strategies make sense in our culture and community.

In your conclusion, you argue that not only should churches make disciples but that they should disciple nations. How do we "disciple nations?"

While it may sound over-simplified, I believe that the inevitable fruit of making disciples is that eventually those disciples will impact their communities and their culture. In the 2004 national election in the Philippines, sixteen Victory members ran for office. Fourteen won. As a result, we have church members who are senators, congressmen, mayors, governors, and city councilors. Their membership at Victory is not the result of an outreach to politicians but rather the result of a discipleship culture which equips and empowers believers to engage culture and make disciples in every sphere of society.

Feel free to interact with Steve in the comments today.

We talk a lot about how our churches can have an impact in their cities-- I am doing a series on how research can under gird such efforts here. Chip Sweney, Next Gen and Community Transformation Pastor at Perimeter Church has written a new book that addresses the issue. Perimeter Church has been doing a leader in all types of ministry for many years. I have been aware of (and impressed by) their work for a long time. So, I'm glad to share something from one of their team.

A New Kind of Big: How Churches of Any Size Can Partner To Transform Communities is now available, and Chip was kind enough to stop by the blog to answer some questions.

Who needs to read this book?

This book is for anyone who has a vision and wants to be inspired in how their church can be of significant influence and impact in their community. The primary audience is pastors, church staff, church planters, and church lay people. This book is for leaders who are tired of counting "nickels and noses" and desire to see kingdom impact in their community. It is for leaders that realize the importance of collaboration and want to see how it can practically be done. "A New Kind Of Big" engages readers through real stories, rather than theoretical ideas, of what God is doing in cities across the United States. "A New Kind Of Big" captures the story of Perimeter Church's journey over the past 9 years as we've moved from being internally focused, to externally focused, to collaboratively engaged with other churches to bless and impact the city. This book is easy to read, and it is very practical for any size church in any location.

What are the major themes in the book?

The primary themes in the book are collaboration, relationships, mobilizing lay leadership, and developing a strategic plan. Collaboration is not just a nice buzzword but is a must in today's world if we are going to make the most impact for the Kingdom. Perimeter's collaborative focus has been in building relationships with non-profit organizations and other churches. As we launched Community Outreach in 2002, we made the decision that we would partner with existing ministries and organizations rather than starting new ministries to serve "the least of these" in our community. This turned out to be a wise decision. Our partners have empowered and equipped our people for serving in ways that we could never have done. We had a deep desire to see significant change in our community and city, and we realized that no one church can change the community. It must be about churches working together, and not just churches from the same denomination or ethnicity but a broad representation of the Body of Christ. We have been proactive in seeking to work together with any other Christ-centered churches who share a passion for blessing our community and city through the gospel. Through this approach, a network of multi-denominational, multi-ethnic, and multi-sized churches has developed called Unite!

Relationships are the foundation that drive, strengthen, and deepen church partnerships through Unite! As we work together on various initiatives we build deeper friendships, and this in turn fuels greater partnering. "A New Kind Of Big" also shares stories of how Perimeter has been able to mobilize lay people as leaders and servants in the community. Lay leadership mobilization has absolutely been the key to church wide mobilization.

"A New Kind Of Big" sheds light on Perimeter's strategic planning process, especially in how we launched our Community Outreach ministry, determined criteria for partnerships, and developed our vision, mission, and goals. It was a very intentional process that led to broad ownership among the Perimeter congregation. Our strategic planning process also includes a long term vision of "what could be" and then how to identify the practical steps of how to get where you want to go.

What are some primary learnings related to the mobilization of our people at Perimeter into the community?

The most important factor in Perimeter becoming a healthier and more externally focused church is that we have a very intentional spiritual formation process of "Life on Life Missional Discipleship", which is also a leadership development engine that has produced mature and equipped believers who want to give their lives away.
In order for an externally focused vision to find traction and success in mobilizing a congregation, the vision must be embraced and cast in a compelling way by the Sr. Pastor (though he/she is not required to lead the effort).

In order to best impact our community, we must be able to understand our community's assets and needs. Perhaps the best way to learn about our community (while developing key strategic relationships) is to do research and interview key stake holders in the community.

We do not formalize a partnership with a non-profit organization or ministry in the community until a lay leader has been identified and mobilized for the partnership.
It is important to offer "exposure" opportunities and easy first steps for people to get a "taste" of serving those in need.

Personal invitation is much more effective than mass communication as an invite. People are much more likely to respond positively to a personal invite from a friend to serve than a bulletin announcement or a mass email.

People often desire to serve more with their families than with their small group. Therefore, it's important to design serving opportunities with both families and small groups in mind.

What are some primary learnings regarding the collaboration of churches?

Relationships drive partnerships and sustain collaborative movements and initiatives. Collaboration must occur not only between churches but also with the public, private, and social sectors in order for the greatest impact in the community. We call this multi sector collaboration.

It's important to develop and cast a compelling vision that is far larger than any one church or organization can handle by itself, thus requiring partnership and collaboration. The vision of Unite! is to see all of metro Atlanta transformed by the power of the gospel, through multi-sector collaboration.

Long term initiatives are more important than one time events. Real change in communities and cities comes from working together over a long period of time on specific initiatives.

Transformation and impact has a much higher likelihood of occurring when Input/Output focused goals (i.e. numbers of volunteers, amount of food collected, etc.) are complimented by "Outcome" focused goals (i.e. increasing high school graduation rates). For churches to effectively lead city transformation movements, they must commit to freeing up church staff or key lay people for such a movement.

Church led city transformation movements are perhaps a more difficult road to travel than para-church led movements, but we have discovered that there are great advantages to doing so.

What are some obstacles to collaboration with other churches?

One obstacle to collaboration is a mindset by churches that "it's easier to work alone", and that collaboration is not worth the effort because of the complexities that often accompany partnership. Another obstacle to collaboration is the fear of giving up control, losing church members to partnering churches, and fear that partnering church ministries may receive greater benefits than our own church. Another obstacle is tunnel vision, getting so caught up in the priorities of our own church, while losing sight of the bigger Kingdom priorities for our community that can only be accomplished through partnership and collaboration. At the end of the day, our belief and experience has been that a God-sized, Kingdom focused vision for the community or city has the capacity to overcome all obstacles to collaboration.

What are some unique characteristics of Unite!?

Unite! is unique in that it is a movement led by local churches. All of Unite! leadership consists completely of pastors and church staff. Most city transformation movements in cities across the United States, are led by para-church ministries and organizations rather than the Church itself. Most para-church organizations would prefer that city transformation movements be led by local churches, because it would allow "para" (which means "alongside of") church ministries, to be in the position of complimenting and coming alongside of the local Church. Unfortunately, most churches don't have the bandwidth, vision, or leadership to lead externally focused city transformation ministry.

Why have a focus on community transformation - why not just preach the gospel?

In 2002, Perimeter Church was 25 years old and many called it a very successful church. However, our Sr. Pastor, Randy Pope, and other key leaders became convicted that we were not a church who had any strategic intentional efforts to care for those in our community who were in need. When we look at Jesus' life as recorded in the Gospels we see him constantly sharing and teaching (Word) and also healing and caring for people's needs (Deed). Matthew 4:23 says, "Jesus was going throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom , and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness among the people." Jesus made it clear with his life and his teaching that the gospel is both Word and Deed. Randy felt that in some respects he had only been preaching half the gospel. There is no doubt that our greatest desire is to see people give their lives to Christ because only then will they experience freedom and eternal life. At the same time we must also care about them physically, emotionally, and socially. We are called as followers of Christ to love people holistically.

Paul says in Colossians 1:20 that the Father through Christ reconciles "all things" to Himself. All things includes not just people but also places and things. We are called to care about our cities and to seek their welfare. (Jeremiah 29:7) When Jesus returns, Revelation 21 says that the holy city, new Jerusalem, will come down out of heaven. This is where we are going as followers of Christ, and we are convinced that we are to work together with others in Atlanta to begin to see transformation (not perfection) right here.

You can check out Chip's new website, ANewKindofBig.com for more on the book. But, he is hanging out with us today on the blog answering your questions in the comments below.

The videos below are an encouraging picture of what God can do in and through churches as they follow Christ on mission. In fact, they document what God has been doing in Bartow County, Georgia. Can local churches of different denominations work together for good and the gospel? Can God transform established churches, and through them transform the community they are sent to? Take the time to watch these videos, praise God for what he's doing in Bartow, and let's pray for more of the same in our own cities. The accents are all Georgia, but the transformation is universal. Lives, churches, and communities are all changed.

Today I am in Phoenix speaking to folks about Transformational Church. I thought I would share some of that with you.

In the book, Transformational Church, Thom Rainer and I explore what churches are doing that are experiencing true gospel transformation. Related to the book is our Transformational Church Assessment Tool (TCAT) that helps churches discover the perceptions of members against the findings of the Transformational Church research. A few of the key areas the TCAT focuses on are missions mentality, leadership, prayer, relationships, worship, group ministry, and mission involvement.

• What do people in your congregation think about important issues relating to the work of the church you serve?
• What do they think about important issues related to spiritual transformation?

An accurate understanding of the perception of your congregation in these and other areas is critical for your work. The Transformational Church Assessment Tool can provide this kind of information and is a key part of becoming a Transformational Church. The goal of this tool is to help churches (any size, any location) make a biblical impact. The Transformational Church Assessment Tool is a statistically accurate tool providing church leaders with critical information on the perceptions of their congregation in key areas of transformation. (via)

Head over to Lifeway for a "how to" of the TCAT.

This August 6-8 I'll be in Chicago participating in The Mainline Call, a conference that targets the revitalization, replanting and pastoring of mainline churches.

They are focused on churches that they call ECOT churches. If you Google "ECOT mainline," it turns out there are many resources geared toward helping mainline churches that want to be "Evangelical", "Conservative", "Orthodox", or "Traditional." I'll be joining John Armstrong, Carmen Fowler, Jim Harrell, John Hull, Bob Thompson, Jim Tomberlin, and David Runnion-Bareford.

If you're in the Chicago area in early August, I hope you'll join us! Register here. Please be praying I will make much of Jesus, the cross, and God's mission.

I recently went to speak at the denominational meeting of The Foursquare Church. A friend of mine, Glenn Burris, was elected president of the denomination this year. One thing that Foursquare did in preparation for this election was to publish questionnaires that were completed by the two candidates (the other candidate was another friend Dennis Easter). One interesting portion of the questionnaire was, "Tell us action steps you believe Foursquare needs to take in the near future." Their answers were fresh and inspiring, and I think they could be said about most denominations right now. As I get ready to participate in the annual meeting for my own denomination, I am particularly sensitive to their wisdom. They offer fresh insight to the church in America.

Tonight, I'm reviewing the message I'll share at Two Rivers, where I serve as Interim Pastor. I love the people there, and am happy to be able to serve the body and work along side them. The Tennesean (our Nashville paper) recently did a story on Two Rivers focusing on its healing and movement forward. If you aren't from around here you probably don't know the details, but it has had some rough days.

The Barna Group has just released four themes they see from their research in 2009. Read the excerpts below, check out the full article here, and come back to discuss.

Theme 1: Increasingly, Americans are more interested in faith and spirituality than in Christianity.

Continue reading Barna's End of Year Review.

I am not a Pentecostal, but I appreciate Pentecostals. I have had the privilege of consulting with or speaking at several different groups and denominations in the Pentecostal and charismatic movement(s). Clearly, there are many wonderful charismatic and Pentecostal Christians doing some amazing things for the Lord. But, the movement has struggled lately with some... well... odd issues over the last few years.

As I recently mentioned, I am intrigued by the Independent Baptist Movement. It is often caricatured and frequently misunderstood, but definitely worth understanding. With that in mind, when I see research on this movement, it catches my attention.

Paul Chappell and Clay Reed have written a book based upon an independent, nationwide survey of independent Baptist churches, and the result is Church Still Works, an insightful read that will prove surprising to some and encouraging to all.

Paul is the senior pastor of Lancaster Baptist Church and president of West Coast Baptist College in Lancaster, California. Clayton is the founder and director of Global Church Planters, which has worked with American missionaries and national pastors to help start more than three hundred churches around the world.

I was happy to talk to Clayton about the new book, and think you'll find the interview and the book helpful.

Back in August I sat down with Mike Harland, Director for Lifeway Worship, to talk through the issues of relevance and reverence in the gathered church's worship. Because I love the church, and hate it when we get distracted from what matters most to God, I decided to share more of my thoughts here on the blog concerning the perennial war over worship.

The reason worship wars exist is because the church thinks it is fighting for something permanent when it is actually temporary. Musical styles and service preferences are like a jacket that can be taken on or off depending upon the temperature. It is used only when needed. Worship as a theological reality is not fit for such pedestrian arguments. It is to exist in the heart of all people-- and it does. When we think we're debating styles and techniques and forms, we are really defending our own affections and deeply felt preferences. Most often we defend what is nostalgic rather than what is helpful. It's no wonder then that even attempts at ceasefires result in more fuel for the blaze.

I will lay my cards on the table: I was not raised in the church or in the subculture of the Bible Belt. I came to Christ at a later age and when I began my ministry it was with the urban poor in Buffalo, New York. I have been called by some "a son of the contemporary church movement." I don't know if that's necessarily true, but I know what it means. I do not have the traditional church DNA in me like so many others I've known, pastored, and appreciated.

So, it could be that it is hard for me to get inside the shoes of the traditional worship advocate. (Though ancient church music has now become a favorite on my iPod.) Or it could be that having come from an irreligious home in addition to my travels observing the worship practices of global Christians that I have a different perspective.

I won't deny I have personal preferences. For instance, it is clear that country and western music is not of God. (That's another joke; don't tell my friend Ricky Skaggs I said that.) Nevertheless, what I try to do is what we all should do in matters of preference and praise-- commit to the reality that worship is not ultimately about us.

And because worship is not about us, I don't think we end the worship wars in our local congregations merely by compromise. Compromise is noble; consensus is better. A truce just gets 100% of our church worshiping at 50%. It is not compromise we want, but unity. So how do we get to that ever-elusive goal, that aim Jesus laid out for us in His High Priestly Prayer in John 17? Here are five ideas.

1. Rally around Truth, Not a Truce

In the same prayer Jesus prayed that His church would be one (John 17:21-22), He prayed that they would be sanctified by the truth of God's word (John 17:17).

When we come at the worship discussion we have to back up a bit and adopt a good theological framework for our conversations, because the church too often leaps to the assumption that "music = worship." Or perhaps we frame it a bit more broadly and think in terms of a "worship service." But the truth is that worship occurs in the whole of life. We are never not worshiping; our affections are always oriented somewhere or to someone. Minimizing worship to a one hour experience on Sunday monrings, or further down to merely the time of music in that experience, means many of us only dedicate thirty minutes of each week to worship of Christ. When we practice this minimization, it means that the rest of the time we're worshiping someone else (usually ourselves).

It is a harsh accusation to make, but as our music and production skills have increased, our worship has suffered because we have engaged in them as the outpouring of self-worship. So we must remember that worship is for every hour of every day of every week. Our lives are to be oriented to the worship of God. And the chances are, if we thought of worship that way, we would not put so much personal stake in hearing our favorite style of music on Sunday mornings. The entirety of our worship would not be loaded into that slice of time.

Holding personal preferences loosely allows for greater unity in the body and advancement of God's mission. The truth God seeks is that we rally to the cause of His glory among the nations rather than deciding is we will have two hymns and three choruses or three hymns and two choruses this Sunday.

2. Acknowledge that Preferences are Personal

I have witnessed the angst around worship music firsthand. I think that in some churches, a pastor could get away with preaching heresy so long as he's cool, funny, and has a good video clip. But if a pastor tries to alter the worship style, it is time to start looking for a new job.

This works both ways, for the favorers of so-called "contemporary praise" and the adherents to more traditional worship music. Neither appears willing to give up ground, and they have planted their flags in either Relevance (for the contemporary folks) or Reverence (for the traditionalists). (Hence, the name of the dialog in the video at the top of this post.)

In many churches where a worship war is brewing or is in outright conflict, one group perceives themselves to be pushing forward toward the next generation (relevance) while another is trying to pull back to a once-honored method (reverence). One group thinks contemporary music or a more casual style will suit the modern generation and appeal more to the lost. Meanwhile the other group thinks all of that is just worldly compromise and, furthermore, arrogant to casually dismiss the styles that have served the church well, in some cases, for hundreds of years.

When either of these scenarios occurs it is usually because we have elevated our preferences to the level of principles. We are "taking a stand" for something important: our own comfort, convenience, and concerns. And all the while we're trying to give God his due or the lost people in the pew it turns out we're really just making worship about us.

3. Realize that Relevance and Reverence Are Not at War with Each Other

What those who push forward should realize is that relevance is not a goal; it is a tool. It is not the end, but one (of many) means to the end. Relevance for relevance's sake never helped anybody. Playing a shocking song at the front of your Easter service may get headlines and upset religious people, but that's about all it does. Having rock music fans think you're a cool church is not the "win" you're really looking for. A smart church will be culturally discerning, but always biblically-driven first.

On the other hand, the traditionalists' placement of reverence on external styles is also wrongheaded. Reverence is not first and foremost an outward expression. It is a quality of the heart. Of course, it results in outward expressions, but take the story of David dancing before the Ark, for example. His free mode of worship was a scandal to Saul's daughter Michal, who was watching from afar. David's heart was turned reverently to the Lord, and this provoked a physical celebration from him. It sure looked irreverent to another. Many times today shouting, clapping, and dancing are seen as disorderly or irreverent or self-indulgent, but all three of those modes of worship are seen in Scripture though curiously absent from "reverent" worship services.

At the heart of many of our worship wars is, sad to say, idolatry. Our worship of things other than God drives the way we contend for ways to worship God. When reverence is equated with austerity, it can reveal an idolization of familiarity and comfort and control. When relevance is equated with a production carte blanche or "freedom of expression," it can reveal an idolization of trendiness and self and showmanship. Both relevance and reverence can cloak idolatry of cultural forms and expressions.

In both cases, what is revealed is an idolatry of music. And music is just... well, music. As my colleague Mike Harland, president of LifeWay Worship has said, "You will never achieve spiritual goals with a musical means." We see music as important in Scripture but never a particular form or function as necessary for discipleship. And never does God dictate a particular style, rhyme pattern, or lyrical format.

4. Embrace Humility

The evangelical church needs a ceasefire on fighting over cultural forms. A focus on biblical meanings will add a healthy dose of humility to our churches.

When I was young in the ministry, I was charged with ministry to both youth and seniors (go figure). One day I was going to lead worship at a nursing home. So, I took my guitar. I'll never forget this 92 year old woman, Miss Langley, who put her hand on my arm and said "Don't worry about the guitar, young man, we're just gonna sing and you can sing with us." I was bringing a relevance they didn't need, and I had to be mature enough to see the hindrance I was about to become.

Imagine would what happen if worship warriors actually took on the attitude of Jesus (per Phillipians 2) and did not regard their agendas as something to be grasped but instead took on the posture of servanthood. What if we (per Romans 12:10) actually tried to outdo one another showing honor? Humility is a "win" for every worshiper.

5. Cultivate Consensus, Not Compromise

We have to be mature enough to worship in different ways, even in someone else's ways. The so-called "blended service" has a typical formula of two songs for me and two songs for you and one song for that other guy. I think it is a sign of carnality and a lack of community in worship. Many times the blended worship service doesn't please anybody but maybe the pastor who has given up trying to cultivate consensus. The blended service is an equal opportunity to anger everyone. It can be a sad compromise.

I also believe we need to be careful about multiple services with specialized genres. What is the motivation? Is the division a compromise? We need to be cautious about pandering to the consumeristic side of Western Christianity. We need to ask ourselves what our motivation is, and be honest with our answer. If we're being mission-focused, that's a good and worthy goal. But if we're market-focused (and Christians are the market), we are off track.

If you go the blended or alternative service route, please do so not because you made a truce, but because you stuffed your egos and decided to glorify God for the sake of reaching your community in a language they understand; Spanish, biker, redneck, liturgical, or whatever.

Do the traditionalists appreciate the contemporary songs? Do the relevantists appreciate the hymns? Do they love each other? Do they see these differing forms as acceptable forms of worship?

Pastored well, a healthy congregation will seek consensus on the positives of God's glory and mission rather than settle for compromise on the negatives of personal preferences and styles. A church in consensus would rather have Jesus than the hymn "I'd Rather Have Jesus." A church in consensus will sing of God's greatness rather than need "How Great is Our God" as their anthem. Music will not bring unity in of itself. Worship brings unity. So long as it is the worship of Jesus.

I have a new article featured at Christianity Today's Building Church Leaders website that focuses on how a local church should discover their particular calling to its larger community. You can read it below. Be sure to check out the BCL site. It has a lot of helpful resources for pastors and church leaders.

Discerning Your Church's Call to Ministry

How does a church discern its call to ministry--creating ministry space that lines up with its mission and vision? Often believers and churches seem to be waiting for God to strike them with a lightning bolt, to reveal what he wants them to do through some spectacular event. But God isn't a genie who pops out of his bottle if we rub it hard enough. A church that waits passively finds itself beset with ministry paralysis.

Then there are the churches that show a degree of life and energy and have significant percentages of the local body engaged in ministry, yet what they do is routine and ineffective. Call it "ministry calcification." Maybe what they are doing was effective five years ago or even last year, but communities can change rapidly. Many churches are ministering to people who have long ago left the community. The missional church constantly assesses what God is doing in a community and what needs are emerging--and adjusts its ministries accordingly.

Do I believe God reveals himself and gives us direction in life? Yes, absolutely. But I also believe he reveals himself more specifically as we obey the commands he has already given us. In other words, God will show us how he wants our church to minister to the community when we act on the directives he has already given us.

Four of the last things Jesus said to his disciples in his final days on earth are a good place for his followers and his churches to seek direction:

Continue reading Discerning Your Church's Call to Ministry.

This morning, I am meeting with some leaders from The Anglican Mission in the Americas. I have a great appreciation of the AMiA folks and am glad they have come in so we could spend the morning talking about church planting and evangelism.

I had the opportunity to keynote one of the early Anglican Mission in America meetings. It was an amazing thing to see hundreds of Anglicans, gathered under the Bishop of Rwanda, worshiping together and talking about God's global mission. And, it has been good to keep in touch with a few of the bishops and pastors.

Today, we are talking about the new Anglican organization in North America, called The Anglican Church in North America, and their plan to start 1000 new churches in the next five years. That is a VERY robust goal for such a new (and relatively small) denomination.

For those of you who do not follow the drama of "all things Anglican," the Anglican journey has been a challenging one over the last few decades.

Wikipedia has a helpful article on the Anglican realignment. Be sure to visit the Wikipedia article for much more information, but here is an introduction:

Anglican realignment is a movement among some Anglicans to align themselves under different oversight within the Anglican Communion. The movement is primarily active in provinces traditionally part of The Episcopal Church (United States) and the Anglican Church of Canada. The conventions of four dioceses of the Episcopal Church voted in 2007 and 2008 to leave the Episcopal Church and join Anglican Church of the Southern Cone of America. Twelve other jurisdictions with approximately one hundred thousand members formed the Anglican Church in North America on December 3-4, 2008, which was set up to create a separate ecclesiastical structure within the United States. The Anglican Church of Nigeria declared itself in communion with the new church in March 2009 and the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans has recognized it as well.

Two major events which contributed to this movement were the 2002 decision of the Diocese of New Westminster in Canada to authorise a rite of blessing same-sex unions; and the ratification by the general convention of the Episcopal Church in the USA of the election of Gene Robinson, an openly gay non-celibate man, as Bishop of New Hampshire the following year.

The movement differs from previous ones in that Anglicans are seeking to establish different ecclesiastical arrangements within the Anglican Communion rather than separating themselves from it. Some Anglican Communion churches, particularly in Nigeria, Kenya, Rwanda and the Southern Cone, are seeking to accommodate them.

A number of parishes that are part of the Anglican realignment have severed ties with the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada and associated themselves with bishops from other national Anglican churches or provinces. Some other American dioceses and parishes (approximately 800 out of some 7,000 Episcopal Church parishes) still officially remain within those two provinces of the Anglican Communion whilst exploring their future options.

Please be praying for these meetings today as we talk about how to advance the mission of God through the planting of new churches.

A recent study by LifeWay Research in partnership with the Cornerstone Knowledge Network showed a correlation between ministry expansion and church growth. Seven types of expansion were included in the survey:

• Building new or additional ministry space at the same site where your church is located.
• Building a new facility at a new site.
• Adding an additional worship service or venue on site.
• Adding an additional worship service or venue off site.
• Beginning to offer streaming video of worship services or teaching on the Internet.
• Directly participating in helping start a new church or churches.
• Merging with another church.

Mark Kelly summarizes the findings:

Of these seven types of ministry expansion, the pastors surveyed indicated that adding an additional worship service or venue on site is most closely related to higher growth in attendance, followed by building new or additional ministry space at the same site where the church is located. Churches that expanded in those two ways experienced significantly higher levels of growth in average worship attendance over a five-year period, according to the pastors surveyed.

It's an interesting study worth looking at. Read the study first at Lifeway Research and at The Christian Post.

This study actually includes both opinion questions and the reporting of facts by pastors.

The fact questions included asking pastors if their church had made any of the 7 changes in the last 5 years. We also asked their current average worship attendance and their attendance 5 years ago. The recollection of the church's attendance 5 years ago could be off slightly for some. After all, this was a phone survey, but it should be close in most cases. Overall, we do consider the number of growing churches reported in this study to be a little higher than when annually reported data is available for comparison.

We ran statistical tests on these facts as reported and the first point in the story is related to these tests. The title we released the information with was stated in the negative, "Ministry expansion doesn't automatically lead to attendance growth." The fact is that causality is not something that we can test at all. However, since it is safe for us to rule out causality if there is not even a statistical relationship we felt comfortable stating this as we did in our release.

The opinion questions show that more than two-thirds of Protestant pastors agree (strongly or somewhat) that 5 of the ministry changes we tested "lead to additional growth." Pastors whose churches have actual made that type of change are more likely to agree, and this was true of all 7 we tested.

We wanted to see what the rest of the pastors believe.

It is interesting to note that all pastors did not agree without hesitation. A look at the PowerPoint that is now up on the LifeWay Research website shows that more pastors somewhat agree than strongly agree in all cases. Also, keep in mind our questions did not ask whether the pastors believe this is the only thing that leads to growth. For example, I can understand why many pastors did not want to disagree that you get some visitors when you open a new building and that some stick around.

The statistical tests we ran that showed a real relationship between two of the changes and growth also prove that only a small portion of the attendance growth is explained by the items we tested. There indeed are other things that lead to growth and some of the spiritual things related to growth would never be able to be tested through research.

Jump into the comments below and share your thoughts and experiences. Has expansion of your church led to, or been a result of, growth.

One of my favorite troublemakers is Frank Viola. When George Barna "entered" house church world (through his writings, at least), one of my comments was that he had not actually connected with any of the people in house church world. In other words, Barna was saying all the things house church people say, but not providing any solutions or awareness of the house church movement. And, I found Revolution to be a relatively unhelpful book for that reason (and several other theological reasons I have stated elsewhere).

In the follow-up book, Barna seems to have jumped whole hog into the house church world with none other than Frank Viola. Together they published Pagan Christianity which riled a lot of people up (me included) and not just because of the not-so-subtle title. For what it is worth, I think New Testament scholar Ben Witherington did a great job in his series on the book (starting here) and Frank was gracious in his response.

Last year, I led a seminar at the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary on "The Future of Church and Mission." Earlier this year I turned that same lecture into an article on the future of the church and its mission for Enrichment Journal, a publication of the Assemblies of God. Here is a condensed version of the article, "Writing on the Wall."

In the movie, Lonesome Dove, Danny Glover portrays Joshua Deets, a cattle-drive scout whose job is to ride ahead of the drive and survey the terrain. Largely responsible for the success and safety of the drive, Deets would inform the team of any obstacles, dangers, enemies, or resources that lay ahead. By assessing the upcoming path, he could help the trail boss make an informed decision about how to navigate the way to the trail drive's destination.

Deets' role is reminiscent of the tribe of Issachar in 1 Chronicles 12:32 -- men who "understood the signs of the times and knew the best course for Israel to take" (NLT). Today, church leaders must act as scouts, fervently asking the Lord for discernment into how they can best practice biblically faithful ministry in their cultures and contexts.

Here are the facts: North America is the only continent in the world where the church is not growing. In North America, the church is in decline. Some even claim it is dying. Most denominations -- including evangelical denominations -- are shrinking.

While the global spread of Christianity and its explosion in the Global South needs to encourage us, our leaders must ask themselves: What must the North American church become and do in this season of decline? The answers all revolve around the gospel.

Continue reading Writing on the Wall.

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

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

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

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

Several Christian leaders at the upcoming "Heart Cry for Revival Conference" are asked and answer, "Why is revival needed among Christian leaders at this point in history?"

• John Avant: "We have become almost completely internalized. We have turned on each other and lost our way. Our churches often simply mirror our leaders. Beginning with me, we need a renewal of love, humility, holiness, and deep compassion for the lost."

• Nancy Leigh DeMoss: "As go the shepherds, so goes the flock. The church desperately needs leaders who are holy, Spirit-filled, prayerful, whole-hearted, anointed men of the Word and servants and lovers of Christ."

Continue reading Why Leaders Need Revival.

On Saturday, I was speaking to the General Association of General Baptist Churches in a very rural part of Missouri.

The General Baptist denomination is an Arminian Baptist denomination. In many ways, they are similar to my own denomination, but they do not hold to the idea of "eternal security"-- or the idea that (in popular terms) once you are a believer you can't "undo" that. This view is held by Wesleyans, many Pentecostals, etc.

Over lunch, we reminsced a bit of the Second Great Awakening history.

Today I am in Bowling Green, KY teaching at First Baptist Church, Bowling Green for the Kentucky Baptist Convention.

Here is a photo of the conference from inside the sanctuary of First Baptist. There were about 350 people at the conference and the KBC announced that they are creating a process around our book, Comeback Churches. You can download the PowerPoint here.

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

Now, you keen students of history know that First Baptist is an important part of the history of the Southern Baptist Convention.

And, since I like to give a "little extra" on the blog...

First Baptist was a key part of what is knows as the Landmark Baptist movement.

Wikipedia explains Landmarkism:

Most theologians and historians who have dealt with Landmarkism have agreed that the following ecclesiological convictions were inherent to the system:

The exclusive validity of Baptist churches

Although different champions of the Landmark Baptist cause have identified different required characteristics, or "marks," that validate a legitimate Baptist church, all varieties of Landmarkism stipulate that legitimate Baptist churches are the only legitimate churches. According to Landmarkism, congregations of other denominational varieties are merely religious gatherings, or "societies," with no claim to the title "church."

The invalidity of non-Baptist churchly acts

Landmark Baptists have refused to recognize as valid any baptisms or ordinations performed in circumstances other than under the auspices of a Baptist church. Thus, Landmark Baptists have declined to allow non-Baptists to preach in Landmark Baptist churches and have required prospective members who have received "pedobaptism" or "alien immersion" to be baptized by a Baptist church before receiving them into membership. Expressed as a syllogism, the Landmark Baptist argument is:

Major premise: To be valid, Christian ordinations and baptisms must be performed by a valid New Testament church.

Minor premise: Only valid Baptist churches are valid New Testament churches.

Conclusion: Therefore, only ordinations and baptisms performed by valid Baptist churches are valid Christian ordinations and baptisms.

The leaders of the Landmark movement were at times called "The Great Triumvirate," made up of J.R. Graves, James Madison Pendleton, and Amos Cooper Dayton.

James Pendleton was the pastor of First Baptist in Bowling Green. His work, Old Landmark Reset, is a foundational document for Southern Baptist Landmarkism. You can download the entire book here, and be sure to note the subtitle: "Ought Baptists to Invite Pedobaptists to Preach in Their Pulpits?"

However, Pendleton did not hold the same views as some other Landmarkers, particularly on "Baptist successionism."

Baptist Successionism

Some Landmark Baptists (not all) believed that the true church could be traced back all the way to John the Baptist. They wanted a view of "succession" that focused on baptism (hence Baptist Successionism). Some saw this as a response to the view of Apostolic Succession, or the belief that Peter ordained (Pope) Linus ordained (Pope) Anacletus... eventually ordained the current pope. I tend to think it had more to do with the Stone Campbell movement's "restoration" views-- Baptists wanted to show they had nothing to "restore." They were always here.

Landmark Baptists believed that the early Christians baptized each other properly. But, they believed, error soon crept in on issues such as baptism. But, some believed there was always a remnant, a "trail of blood." So, the Montanists baptized the Donatists, who baptized the Paulicians... eventually baptizing Southern Baptists.

You can click here to download the chart with all the details. (As a young pastor, I once preached at a rural North Carolina church with this very chart painted on the wall.)

James Milton Carroll, decades later, wrote The Trail of Blood, telling the full story from the Landmark Baptist successionism perspective. You can download the whole book/pamphlet here. Over 2 million copies were published and its influence on the denomination was profound.

Some people mistakenly equate successionism with Landmark ecclesiology although, as with Pendleton, one can be the latter without being the former.

So What is Landmark Baptist Ecclesiology?

Theopedia explains in more detail:

The impetus for the movement was the publication of Pendleton's An Old Landmark Reset in 1854, and the Cotton Grove meeting of Baptists in 1851. The meeting at the Cotton Grove Baptist Church near Jackson, Tennessee sought to answer five questions:

"(1.) Can Baptists with their principles on the Scriptures, consistently recognize those societies not organized according to the Jerusalem church, but possessing different government, different officers, a different class of members, different ordinances, doctrines and practices as churches of Christ?

(2.) Ought they to be called gospel churches or churches in a religious sense?

(3.) Can we consistently recognize the ministers of such irregular and unscriptural bodies as gospel ministers?

(4.) Is it not virtually recognizing them as official ministers to invite them into our pulpits or by any other act that would or could be construed as such recognition?

(5.) Can we consistently address as brethren those professing Christianity who not only have not the doctrine of Christ and walk not according to his commandments but are arrayed in direct and bitter opposition to them?"

The emphasis of Landmarkism is:

-that the church is local and visible only;

-that the church has had a continuous existence since its organization by Jesus before Pentecost until the present day (sometimes called Baptist successionism or church perpetuity);

-that the Great Commission was given to the church (local churches) only; and

-that baptism and the Lord's supper are church ordinances and are only valid when performed by authority of a New Testament (Baptist) church.

So, today I spent that day at a church that was part of a movement... interesting indeed.

Although I am not teaching history today, I thought you might find it interesting!

Here is a picture of the baptistry. It is big-- very big. I am guessing 8 people could fit in there. There is a dome over it and it is the most distinct feature in the sanctuary (which, makes sense, considering the info above).