I admire, respect and have learned much from Tim Keller and his ministry in Manhattan. I always learn from engaging his writings, he being a primary representative of the neo-Reformed world, and one intensely involved in on the ground ministry. Engaging his writings gives me an opportunity to locate distinctives of the neo Anabaptist Missional impulse versus the Neo-Reformed Missional. And there should be room for both in the Kingdom of God in our time. Recently Dr. Keller wrote a post recommending that young pastors and seminarians consider being a “Country Parson” as a suitable training ground for future ministry. Here a young pastor can learn the ways of leading a church, governing an elder board, handle fund raising, do counseling, shepherding, teaching and preaching, handle conflict etc. A lot of this post makes sense.
Like Tim, I also meet a lot of men and women graduating from seminary seeking a first time position in ministry. In contrast to Tim however, the young pastors/seminarians I meet are not anxious to take a position on the staff of a large church. Nether are they rejecting the small country church because they have aspirations to work in a large church. They reject the large church setting because they are reluctant to become part of “the machine” which works tirelessly to develop and sustain programming to both achieve certain goals within the existing congregation and grow it ever larger and larger. Many are tired of the consumerist busy lifestyles of cities and suburbs and seek a “Wendell Berry type” setting in farm country.
So with Dr Keller, I also recommend the small church as a place of ministry for young pastors and seminarians. In difference from Dr Keller however, I recommend the small urban and/or suburban church (as opposed to the country small church). Most often, these urban/suburban churches are in a death spiral amidst the vestiges of post Christendom urban/suburban centers. The small country churches are in many cases hanging on and in some cases thriving in a still largely Christian friendly rural culture. I suggest these small dying urban/suburban congregations could be the place for renewal in our times. I suggest that we go there not only to practice leadership but also to till the soil of what is left of old days of Christendom. These small community churches, often in middle-lower income places, have been deserted by middle-upper middle-income evangelicals who have migrated to the local mega church. These are the places where the poor and hurting are most visible. These are the places that are (more) affordable for younger pastor/leaders. I suggest that these places have great potential for renewal because they are desperate. Here we can enter tough situations, congregations with long instilled Christendom habits. Here it will take many years and patience to nurture the renewal of Christian mission.
There are literally thousands of these churches in death mode in this country. My own denomination released some stunning statistics to us a couple weeks ago. Only the top 20% of all churches are growing (I’m rounding off these numbers). Most of these are mega church type churches-or churches in process of becoming a mega church (and excited about it). The remaining 80% is shrinking so fast they shall largely disappear within 5-15 years. The vast majority of the growth of the 20% is transfer growth from the other 80%. Among this large majority of churches that are dying, are small aging congregations who are slowly losing hope, a sense of mission in the urban and suburban settings of N America. Their people are living deep within the Christendom assumptions of the West. They still ask question that address “how can we attract more people into our church services?” They largely see outreach as church building centered. Most know few if any non-Christians in the regular rhythm of their lives. Most of the remaining aging attendees have moved ten to twenty miles away from the church location while they still hang on to. Yet they continually ask “how can we get more young people into our church?” “How can we connect to the culture?”
Like Tim’s “country church”, these churches are often spurned by the young pastor/seminarians, “mega church pastor” wannabe. Many of these old buildings sit on a prime site in a declining part of a little downtown. They have become memorials to a Christendom gone by. Ironically, because of different cultural forces, the country church has remained somewhat immune from these secular cultural forces. The suburban and urban small declining churches however, and there are thousands of them, have not, and they are closing by the hundreds every year. The time commitment here will be many many years as the aging people remaining are (often) deeply set in their ways. Bridges will have to be built. Many years of teaching and shaping missional imagination will be necessary because it take years to build the ethos of a missional community that is vibrant and engaging in the neighborhood context.
Of course, I contend that this new missionary situation demands a totally different approach to leadership than the one Tim describes in his post. As opposed to the hierarchical senior pastor approach more comfortable in the Neo-Reformed world, this kind of task will take a community of pastor/leaders who share responsibilities, who carry on theological integrity of the gospel, and who live bi-vocationally so as to spend time and money in the neighborhood context (see this post here). I recommend these small urban/suburban dying congregations as places for “new” ministry because they most often realize they have reached the end of their rope, haven’t the financial resources to sustain a full time pastoral staff and are open to thinking about staffing differently. For Neo-Anabaptist Missionals, these situations are not the places to learn the “solo-pastor” role so much as places to nurture under God’s grace a community of leadership for the new missionary situation we are confronted with.
In short, I am inspired by Dr Keller’s passion for training pastors and I see the small Country church as a viable option for pastors in the Neo-Reformed mold of ministry. For Neo Anabaptist Missional training however I see equally the dying urban/suburban smaller church as a main option. I’ve seen amazing things among these formerly dying places (see for instance Englewood Christian Community which was a 60′s mega church in urban Indianapolis transformed into a missional center). The situations are plentiful yet take unusual social and leadership skills. God bless both the Neo-Reformed and Neo Missional movements for their unique perspective on the place of the small church in the renewal of God’s Kingdom in N. America.
Has anyone else seen transformation among the dying urban/suburban congregations? We need some stories to inspire imagination here!
_______________________________
Interested in meeting some people involved in these kind of church situations? Join us at the Missional Learning Commons. A non/conference gathering of “missional co-conspirators.” Check out info on the missional commons website. If you’re going to show up let us know via the Facebook Page, or e-mail me at fitchest@gmail.com. No other registration needed
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Thanks for the interesting post, David.
You write, “I contend that this new missionary situation demands a totally different approach to leadership than the one Tim describes in his post. As opposed to the hierarchical senior pastor approach more comfortable in the Neo-Reformed world, this kind of task will take a community of pastor/leaders who share responsibilities, who carry on theological integrity of the gospel, and who live bi-vocationally so as to spend time and money in the neighborhood context….” Do you have any thoughts as to why “the hierarchical senior pastor approach” is common among Reformed and Neo-Reformed churches?
Also, I was surprised to read that you are part of a denomination. To which do you belong?
David…you are the bomb!!!
I totally agree with you…having just left a mega that has tried to overcome the things you are fingering (pun) I still wonder if megachurch discipleship is an oxymoron…and find younger pastors not wanting to be in the bigger is better culture.
So…great thoughts!
David,
I appreciate your writing. I am a lay leader in a smallish suburban C&MA church in Michigan and we are struggling to find ways to transition to a missional mindset.
One point wasn’t clear to me: Are the statistics you cite findings regarding C&MA churches, or are they broader statistics (say, about evangelical churches in general)?
What I mean is, does “Only the top 20% of all churches are growing” mean that the top 20% of C&MA churches are growing, or the top 20% of some other broader category?
Well …
Jonathon … yes the statistics (rounded off) refer to C&MA and were what I heard presented in a recent meeting. I don’t know if they’ve been released to all workers yet?
and Josh, my denomination (in which I am ordained in) is the Christian and Missionary Alliance.
Josh as far as why Neo-Reformed gravitate towards positional leadership and Ananaptist gravitate towards more dispersed commuanl flat leadership forms – there’s a lot of profound theological and historical reasons. One historical reason is that Reformed theology is a reaction to/but highly dependent upon Christendom for ts cultural understandings, Anabaptist rejects the Christendom forms of polity, cultural relationships. One theological reason is that Reformed theology sees authority in the BIble alone lifted up above the church and accessible to each individual. Yet this modern construct privledges the skills of exegesis and correct intrprettaion so the professiional takes on a natural prominence. The Anabaptist sees interprettaive autority located more in the community, surely the gifted preacher teacher, but as empowered by the Spirit and recognizied by the community. Authoirty is by nature deventralized. There are much more in depth issues here.. which perhaps I can do an extended post on some day.
Would there be a way to engage the largely retired membership of these urban/suburban churches to become bivocational ministers? These older persons have heard the gospel many times; they have an income to support themselves; how could they be given a voice in their communities. Maybe they only know how to connect with people their age, so even if they made friendships/ministered to those of their age, they might be building bridges to the next generation since most elderly people have family who are younger.
In our small western Canadian city (120,000) in the last four years two small churches closed their doors and two more are nearly there. One large church has dwindled from 800 (2005) to 250.. though half the numbers have transferred to the two large churches in town…
A bit off topic, although not entirely, but how would you characterize missional Anglicanism (were such a creature to exist)? Would it be a subset of the Neo-Reformed Missional?
Richard,
I see Missional Anglicanism as a partner (ironically)in navigating post Christendom with NeoAnabaptists. Their great resourses for spiritual formation (in liturgy etc.) ground us in the history and narrative in ways modernist frameworks emanating from Reformed portestantism can’t.Of course, there are issues (tere always are). But for those of us who see Enlightenment modernity – and its allignment with Christendom – as the problem … it will take the joint resources of anabaptist and liturgical traditions to move forward into Mission. I see Todd Hunter and what he is doing in AMIA as an excellent example here
Interesting.. we are only beginning to make connections locally with the mainline churches.. but already I see potential..
Dave–now you’re speaking to my world. Small, urban church, lots of hurting people, lot’s of Christendom remainders both helping and hurting the mission of the church. People aren’t there for a show, but still have conflicting views on what the point of a Sunday service is, where ministry happens, etc. It’s a tough transition to make, but very worthwhile and rewarding.
I have worked in both the rural-country context where christendom is still very much alive and in the more urban-collegiate context of a post-Christian, multi-ethnic culture. While there are some major differences, it seems like many of those differences are rooted in similar problems. For instance, both types of cultures are living out of a world-view which I believe differs from the biblical worldview. While the christendom context may utilize more Christian/Biblical vocabulary to speak of their story, I believe that body of language means now and what it means in the Bible are different (and sometime very different).
If this is the case (and I may be oversimplifying the case) would it not seem then that to counter both worldviews with the biblical worldview would require a confrontation with the gospel-the redemptive story of God in history along with its goal and intent? If so, then it seems that many of the required skills necessary (i.e., preaching, mentoring, etc…) could be honed in either context. What would seem not to translate so well would be the questions we raise that undermine the different unbiblical worldviews and the contextualized response we make.
Grace and peace,
Rex