Someday someone is going to look at our innovation and say, “It doesn’t matter how you used to do it… it’s not working anymore.” What will happen when what we’re doing isn’t working any more?
I have been accused of changing things too much… 
OK, I’ll give you this much… I do have a tendency to initiate change.
Someday though someone is going to look skeptically on the change that I’ve facilitated… what will they say? What will they initiate? Will I fight it? Will I support it?
What is the next “Best way” of doing church?
Just thinking…
Looks like I’m not the only person thinking about this either… (read more here)
Advertisement
I could be wrong but I think that, written or unwritten, a core value of any organization that thrives over time is that they stay true to their mission and vision as well as EMBRACE CHANGE.
If the world is changing around you, you better change too. In fact, shouldn’t the church be ahead of world, leading the way when it comes to change?
Paul,
How about this quote; “Denominations that change their methods and cast off unprodcutive tradition will flourish and experience God’s power, while those who insist on the status quo will die a slow, unpleasant death.” Bill Hull, The Disciple-making Church, p. 11
I believe that we can safely say that this applies to individual local churches as much as denominations!
Chris,
I agree with the leading the way if you mean siezing the opportunites for ministry before the world does. The believers ought to be first to respond to a crisis. The believers ought to be the first to see a new idea and capture its potential for the glorification of God. PowerPoint is a classic example. We as a church don’t need to be the designers of presentation software; yet we do need to think, “How could we use this at _______”(insert the name of the ministry that you are serving in right now)?
Both you guys,
I am a fellow change-monger! Keep up the good work and push the boundaries of practice while remaining true to doctrine!
Mike
Justin’s artwork is a perfect example of ministry use of a medium, idea, new process, etc. Again, way to go Justin!
I’m not sure that the “best way” we have now ever was the “best way” seems great for head counts, but seems a little on the shallow end of the pool to me. Maybe that’s why simple is better, maybe our best way is not the answer. I’m calling for a return to finding out what HIS best way is.
thanks for the link…
Mark,
I want it both ways! When HIS way is our way we will be doing it better.
Acts is filled with “head counts”. So that is not the caveat that you want in order to disallow new “best ways”. HIS best way did draw heads!
Mike
I agree we have to change with the times, but too many changes at once can overwhelm a congregation and create chaos. This can lead to many problems that might not have occurred had the changes been made with more thought as to the timing and the consequences. This seems to be especially true when a new pastor enters a church. Many times the new pastor wants to implement his own practices and make himself “comfortable” in his new role based on what he’s done in the past. This can be done with little or no thought as to how this will affect his new staff and congregation, because “it worked at my other church(es) so it’ll work here.” However, it takes time (and sometimes lots of it) to become familiar with the new church (meaning the people, not the building), it’s traditions (whether they’re similar to yours-the new pastor’s-or not), and it’s thoughts and feelings on certain things.
Change is generally a very hard thing to accept, especially when it’s “forced” on you, as when a church goes through a pastoral change! This can really shake up a congregation, especially if the former pastor was beloved by many! The new pastor has to deal with these emotions while trying to deal with his/her own emotions of leaving a church they were comfortable with and loved in (or not). This cannot be easy for anyone!! Then, for a new pastor to come in and try and erase everything the former pastor did in order to create his own “identity” in the church (at least appearing to do so in the congregation’s opinion), this can create some very hard feelings on both sides. The pastor can feel rejected and unfairly criticized and the congregation can feel hurt and compromised.
All of this just to say, from the “congregation’s side,” the timing of change(s) is EXTREMELY important and should not be taken lightly or be done “just because.” A new pastor must be willing to be patient and listen VERY carefully to God’s leading in order to make the right moves when dealing with a new congregation who are already “suffering” from hard or hurt feelings! Just a suggestion!
I agree the church should be “up with the times” in most things, but we have to be careful we don’t become too focused on worldly things in order to make our services “effective.”
If you do not change eventually you will become as stale as the stereotypes about religion. when young people come into a church the thing that draws them is the modern things, once they are there the “oldies but goodies” can be taught. If you are not changing things up you will be teaching the same lessons to the same people until the congregation dies out. A pond is stagnant but a river is constantly changing, which water would you drink?
Lets talk about hats,as Pastor Bryon Mondok refers to them:
pointy ones, cowboy hats, baseball caps- it doesnt matter,
In the old church the one who gave the most finacially had the priviledge of sitting in the front row.
To enhance her status, the women usually would wear a large, colorful,loud hat! No one wanted her to complain.
We (the church) all have a responsibility in the church.(even the back row!!) I listen to some complain but privitally I question: Where are you when..?
When is the last time you served?
Do you know what the needs are?
Can you be used? Do you have time? Is God calling you?!
I say build a relationsip with the leadership,lets find a purpose and a connection to find Gods will in all of this! The amazing thing is that the one serving will be blessed!
The change in the church is not because of the pastor- isnt he a servent too? The leader of the church is Jesus Christ. He is the one who ‘shakes things up’!
I’ve used an automobile/caravan analogy in the past. I’ll pick it up again on this “change” topic. Have you ever traveled in a long line of cars before? How did you stick together? What kind of changes did you make?….Changing lanes…Turning left or right. How did you communicate to each other about those changes? Signals!
Suppose someone made a turn with out first signaling. How could that create a problem for the ones following them? Perhaps if the followers weren’t prepared, they could miss the turn and feel a bit lost. Change is more easily accepted and less confusing when you know it’s coming and you’ve been prepared.
Suppose the head car in the caravan approached a yellow light and instead of slowing down, sped through. Sure it happens. A leader who has made this mistake before may have learned from it and will considerately pull over and wait patiently for the others to catch up. Change is more easily accepted when we stick together.
Suppose someone kept changing lanes even when there appeared to be no reason to change lanes. Meanwhile you’re kind of left wondering what’s the purpose of all these changes. They’re kind of hard to follow. Although you’re not opposed to necessary change, a certain degree of predictability would help you feel less anxious. Change is more easily accepted when you can see the purpose in it.
And sometimes there just needs to be no change for a while so you can adapt and relax a little and coast.
Pingback: Pastor Chris
I say to Maureen’s comment…AMEN AMEN AND AGAIN AMEN!!!! Also, our series about shattered.. and Jesus being a rebel…. doesn’t give us (any of us) permission to be a rebel and go against just about everything.
also, if it isn’t broken DON’T CHANGE IT TO JUST CHANGE IT.
Have you ever attended a church that is run like a “closed shop”? Three or four families take up the front pews. Aunt Millie and Uncle Walt run the church supper and heaven forbid if any newcomer tries to suggest spaghetti instead of ham. Cousins Bob and Jim take the offering which often includes a share for a missions trip that one of their children just happens to be selected for. The church board spends weeks interviewing for a new Pastor and finally makes the ultimate choice. All goes well until the poor guy preaches a sermon given to him by God to deliver to a modern-day world. Surely, Aunt Millie and Uncle Walt are familiar with the phrase “Man of God”! Why then, are they upset when their new hire “rocks the boat”? (or should I say the church?) Could it be they have become so pompous and puffed up that they now feel threatened? Could it be that their church had become a Sunday morning, Wednesday night private social club, rather than a welcoming refuge for lost souls? Personally, I’m a back row person. God knows I’m there and that’s all that matters. I enjoy listening to a Man of God telling it like it is; waking me up, reminding me what needs to be fixed in my life and helping me be a fix to someone else’s life! If it takes an “upstart” MAN OF GOD, who’s less than half my age, with all new ideas, so be it! I’m sure someday God will say “Job well done”.
Why are the people who are “against” change and even those who would like to see it brought on with more warning or subtlety vilified? Change is ALWAYS constant, but NOT always good, right or appropriate! Is there no truth to the saying, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”?
Is a pastor, because he is a “man of God,” given carte blanche to do as he pleases as long as he/she believes they’re doing it for God or because they feel God has led them to do it? A “man of God” is first and foremost a MAN. Can such a man not make mistakes? Can the church not question anything? Are we all supposed to be “yes-men/women,” so as not to create any controversy?
Something seemingly “petty” to one may be “very important” to another. Can something you or I see as “petty” become a stumbling block for a brother?
Just a few questions to make us think before we continue to “poo-poo” the opinions of the “traditionalist.”
Some thoughts about “if it is not broken, don’t fix it”: something doesn’t have to be broken to be improved upon. Automobiles were considered safe until someone invented seat belts.
Maureen…you hit the nail on the head. I am reminded of a story about a pastor that wanted to move the pulpit from the side of the platform to the middle. He wanted to preach from the middle of the platform. One Sunday he moved the pulpit and preached from the new position. The next day the Adminstrative Board of the church met and did not like the change and asked the pastor to leave. A year later that pastor was back in that town and decided to visit his old church and he noticed the new pastor preaching with the pulpit in the middle of the platform. Stumped and confused he went to the new pastor and asked how he was able to pull that off. His reply “three inches per week”.
Change will happen, it is often required but change for the sake of change; or change just to fit the comfort zone or vision of the leader…? Radical and abrupt changes have the greatest potential for opposition and reluctance on the part of those affected by the change. This type of change is often fostered by impatience. A trait of a good leader is to initiate change and make the people of the organization believe that the change is their idea. This approach requires knowledge of the organization, the people in the organization, and patience to execute the changes; and a willingness to adjust to meet the response. The time to justify the change is before it is initiated, not after.
Ok I have been rambling in generalities. Change for the sake of change, change that compromises, change that is not accepted, change that takes the focus away and distracts from your mission is distructive. The pastor may be the leader of the local church but the membership is the church. If the pastor has to, from the platform, keep telling the congregation to stay focused on the mission that the jeans, volume of the music, etc. should not be the focus; then there is a problem and he is acknowledging the problem. Why are people focusing on these things and not the central mission of the church??? Because the pastor or the leadership of the church has redirected their attention by making these diversions issues for the church; or the change was not implemented as well as it could have been. Making the membership feel that their focusing on the changes or issues is petty and that they have a problem because of the distractions is not the real issue. There is more than one way to make change happen and maybe some changes will not work. The second pastor in the story above knew the congregation and the Admistrative Board and was able to make the changes the previous pastor could not.
I will also acknowledge that there are those that have embraced the changes, that is the luxury of diversity. And are the changes alone the real issue here??
I have made my share of mistakes in initiating change at my place of employment. I am far from perfect and have scars to prove it. Leadership requires having your finger on the pulse of the organization (in this case the chruch)that you are leading. Enough said. I have often wished for a “do-over”. Not always possible.
Pingback: Whoa... let's laugh a bit « Paul Peterson
The way I see it change for the sake of change rarely works, change without the consent or cooperation of those being changed usually ends in disaster and change being forced is the worse of all.
That being said, after the damage is done one should do what one can to rectify the situation, not gloss it over and bring in more change as that confuses the issue further.
Some things went well, some not so well and some were and still are not even close to what they were. A lot of things were fixed that weren’t broken but now are and aren’t being fixed.
That is where I am at this point. I have not yet given up but I see only tiny glimpses of light at the end of the tunnel.
All I can say is that I hope Max isn’t being welcomed in Chile the way Paul is. How sad to think that we as members of one community and purpose can be so judgmental and hurtful to one of our own. Imagine how a new-believer or a non-believer would feel reading this blog- reading what people are not so subtly
saying about a fellow believer, I would walk away saying “I wonder what they must think about me.”
I could have quite a lot to say to that but for the sake of what people do read, which by the way I am completely aware that this can be viewed by anyone, I will refrain. My intent is not to be hurtful or judgmental. I do believe that Our Church has a purposeful mission with a bunch of imperfect people working hard to accomplish it. This relevant disturbance didn’t just pop up out of nowhere. I really believe that it would never have made it here if it had been dealt with at the start. I would prefer to have issues dealt with privately but that has not been successful. The voices of the congregation at various ages are being ignored. Then if persisted it becomes an issue of someone being focused on their own needs. I don’t think that is fair. Are we suppose to be pretenders or people who want to deal with real issues? To set the record straight, I feel that Paul is heartfelt in bringing people to Christ. This is not to be hurtful to him or attack him. I pray for him and lift him up. I pray that he will have wisdom beyond his years to be able to relate to all the needing age groups. There are issues however that have been declared as not important and some of the issues are important to me and many others. I don’t see it as an being selfish or self focused. I didn’t and don’t appreciate that judgement on myself by others especially by people who have never once attended Northgate. I don’t think that they would be disappointed in Northgate either. I think our church has been doing some really good things. Not listening to the needs, hurts, and concerns of the members is not one of them. Shutting the door on the ones that have some issues doesn’t make them just go away either. I recognize that being a Pastor is not an easy job and I don’t feel that it is a job that I would be able to do. That is why I am not doing it. Whoever does take the position should and can expect to cover a broad range of issues at any time. I don’t think anyone is doing any backstabbing here. Subtleness has not worked. Directness might. I mean why would it ever get to the point that it has if it hadn’t been ignored to begin with. As far as Max, I feel and have felt Paul was welcomed very well into Northgate. Perhaps it would be a tough road for whoever took the Pastorship. I also hardly doubt that Max is behaving the same problem in Chile. I think that the last thing Paul or Northgate needs is a comparison. That isn’t fair to either of them. I would hope that things are easier for Max and I would like things easier for Paul. However, they each have a responsiblity in how hard that they make it for themselves. If Max is changing things in Chile he may get some resistance but I think He has the choice of how he makes changes, Just as Paul does. Some things don’t need to be changed when they even have been said to be irrelevant. Why change irrelevant things. This is more than the furniture placement. It has to do with the attitude towards the various traditions and comfort zones of people. The title of this area of the blog is its not working anymore. Well..what has been going on isn’t working anymore. That being how to deal with the emotions and traditions of the people who have committed themselves to the body of Christ at Northgate Free Methodist Church. People from all different states and churches can submit all that they want the bottom line is what works for Northgate may not work for Perry Nobles Church or The Albion Church or some church in AZ. We have to do what works for our Church here in Batavia NY to continue to Bring and Build people. What does it take to keep the people connected and content and focused on that? Well, Yes. All of the changes we have had do have a way of making one feel disconnected. I would not expect everyone to know the difference but someone who has been on this mission with Northgate will the the differences. Is the goal to get rid of the ones who have been attending and know the difference? I wouldn’t expect someone who started to attend in the last few months to feel any of this disconnection.
Max spent a year in language school FIRST LEARNING THE LANGUAGE AND CULTURE of Chile…seems like that’s necessary in order for the Chileans to be able to receive what he has to offer in service to them. As far as I can tell he didn’t go there and demand that the Chilean pastors do church “the Northgate way”. He and Kristin demand that their children speak to everyone around them-including themselves-in Spanish when they are with Chileans. The Chileans love and appreciate them for their service to and respect for the culture that THEY came into. Perhaps the Chilean style of worship is out of their comfort zone…but even if that is the case, they have not railed against it. I guess we can all draw our own comparisons…
I think change is necessary and inevitable. I have a cousin that lives in Colorado. He came to a Northgate service about two years ago and pretty much thought it was a little stale. He came again in April, but this time he said that he felt the presence of God as soon as he stepped in the door. The place felt alive. If that isn’t a good thing I don’t know what is. A little testiment to how much change happens.. http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift
Sad to see you go Paul, thought you were great and did awesome things for us.
I have to agree with Dawn. And I have to agree with Lori. I hope and pray that Paul and Sherri take with them the love of Northgate.