A Common Burden Between Us
Topic: Denominations, Evangelism, Guest Author, Local Church, SBC, Weblogs| Written by: Todd Littleton|Art Rogers pointed me to a post by Timmy Brister. “Ministerially Speaking” is a euphemism for exaggeration. Many over the years have given a free pass to those of us who preach when we have overstated to make a point. You may have heard, or said yourself, “Now this is not ministerially speaking.” The reference indicates our own growing discomfort with the reality words mean something. Exaggeration should not pass as the truth.
I repost Timmy’s indictment on us all to continue to make my point our issues tend to be systemic rather than exclusively connected to a single persona. Had Timmy taken the same data from our church he would have made similar discoveries - and dare I say we all would succumb to the evidence of our own pastoral contexts. Tom Ascol’s repeated calls for accountability when it comes to church membership make the same point. Something is amiss when we pass ourselves off as something we are not.
Please note there the peculiar reason Timmy used the illustration he did. Rather than excoriate him, or me for re-posting, pause and think reflectively on the issues at the heart of this problem. Maybe you will offer a solution or corrective. This post is offered with the author’s permission.
“Ministerially Speaking”
“Though official statements still affirm the doctrine of regenerate church membership, statistics indicate a different reality for the great majority of Baptist churches in North America.”
- John S. Hammett, Professor of Systematic Theology, SEBTSIntroduction
A couple of weeks ago, I was sitting in class when my professor was discussing characteristics of biblical leadership, and during that discussion I learned of a term often used when talking about churches and their statistics. The term “ministerially speaking” is used when someone does not accurately present the facts or stats but rather exaggerates or embellishes the truth to their own benefit.
In Southern Baptist life, numbers and statistics seem to be a big deal. You will hear the defense and argument everywhere from the fact that we have a book in the Bible called “Numbers” to the pragmatic rationale of management principles for ministerial success. Over the course of my experience as a Southern Baptist with the heightened emphasis on numbers, I had become frustrated because of my conviction that we had auctioned the church off to corporate America and unrestrained pragmatism in the pursuit of upholding denominational dominance and triumphalism. Every time for instance, when you hear that we Southern Baptists account for 16+ million people, we of course are “ministerially speaking.” For example, while in 2004 Southern Baptists reported a total of 16,267,494 members, only 6,024,289 (37%) were on average present for Sunday morning worship. The 16 million is the number we report to the secular media, and the 6 million is the number we report to God–and that on a good day.
“Ministerially Speaking” in Focus
But at this particular juncture and season of SBC politics, “ministerially speaking” perhaps is best seen when Baptist Press announces another candidate for an SBC office. At the very heart of their reporting, you will find a lot of numbers, most of which comes from the Annual Church Profile database. For instance, let’s take the most recent candidate for president, Frank Cox, pastor of North Metro Baptist Church in Lawrenceville, Georgia.
Baptist Press reports,
“Cox has been North Metro’s pastor for more than 27 years. Under his leadership, the church has grown from 700 members to more than 4,600, with 3,600-plus individuals added to the church fellowship as baptized believers.”
I have to pause for a moment to emphasize a stat that I love, perhaps the most important of them all. Cox has been at North Metro for 27 years and stands as a testament to pastoral permanence in a flighty generation. I praise God for men like Frank Cox who find their life assignment in loving a congregation and leading them to reach their world for Christ.
But notice with me that the church has grown to 4,600 members with over 3,600 added through believer’s baptism. Those numbers are certainly impressive. But “ministerially speaking,” it could be even more impressive if you consider what Bob Terry, editor of The Alabama Baptist recently shared. In the February 21, 2008 editorial, Terry wrote the following:
“Other out-of-state speakers include Frank Cox, who is returning to the Alabama Baptist Evangelism Conference, and Herb Reavis Jr., senior pastor of North Jacksonville Baptist Church, Jacksonville, Fla. Cox, who previously spoke at the 2005 and 1998 state evangelism conferences, is senior pastor of North Metro Baptist Church, Lawrenceville, Ga. During his 25-plus years as pastor, he has led the church to grow from just under 500 members to more than 5,400.”
Now which is it? 4,600 members or 5,400? That’s a significant difference, don’t you think? But we must go on as more numbers await us.
A couple of paragraphs further in the same BP article, they add:
“The most recent information available, Southern Baptists’ 2006 Annual Church Profile Survey, lists 110 baptisms and primary worship service attendance of 1,737 for North Metro.”
According to Baptist Press, North Metro has at least 4,600 members but only 1,737 who show up on any given Sunday. We are not talking here about Sunday School, service, or ministry; rather, we are talking about those who simply sit in a pew on Sunday morning. Doing a little math will reveal that 37% of their membership are visibly present on Sunday (exactly the percentage from 2004 stated above), or put another way, nearly 2 out of 3 members do not attend “primary worship” services. Now the question then, is, why do we not talk about the numbers which are more realistic than the big, bloated numbers which so often get touted on newspaper write-ups and articles? But we must go on as more numbers await us.
Taking the same ACP data Baptist Press uses for their statistics, I have compiled the relevant data from 2000-2006 regarding North Metro as it is not really fair to look at a church over one year. So I wanted to see the church over a decent period of time, so I choose this seven-year period, and here is how the numbers shaped up:
Analysis
2000
3980 members
2636 resident members
141 baptisms
185 other additions
2003 primary worship attendance2001
4000 members
2921 resident members
209 baptisms
246 other additions
2000 primary worship attendance2002
4488 members
2960 resident members
140 baptisms
229 other additions
1425 primary worship attendance2003
3931 members
3164 resident members
193 baptisms
219 other additions
1496 primary worship attendance2004
4055 members
3278 resident members
140 baptisms
214 other additions
1676 primary worship attendance2005
4188 members
3396 resident members
162 baptisms
199 other additions
1944 primary worship attendance2006
4302 members
3486 resident members
110 baptisms
228 other additions
1737 primary worship attendanceTotal Baptisms 2000-2006 1,095
Total Other Additions 2000-2006 1,520
Membership Growth from 2000-2006 322
Attendance Growth from 2000-2006 -266
Number of “Inactive” Members 2,565
A/A Differential* 2,615/-266
UCM Index** 60%* A/A Differential = Total additions 2000-2006 / Total attendance growth 2000-2006
** UCM Index = 2006 Inactive Membership divided by 2006 Total MembershipThe last paragraph is the totals of 2000-2006 combined. Take a moment, and consider these numbers with me.
First, while North Metro added 2,615 through baptism and “other additions,” their membership increased by only 322. What are we saying about the relationship of baptism and church membership? Ministerially speaking, the church grew by 2,615 members; biblically speaking, church membership increased by 322.
Second, again while North Metro added 2,615 during those seven years, they had a net decrease of -266 in primary worship attendance. What are we saying about the gospel and conversion when we baptized 1000+ people only to see a church decline in attendance during that same period? Ministerially speaking, the church added 2,615 people; biblically speaking, the church declined by 266 people.
Third, the total membership in 2006 was not 4,600 or 5,400 as Baptist Press reported but 4,302. But even with that number, the average attendance of 1,737 divided by 4,302 comes to 60% of the church not fulfilling their basic responsibility of worshiping God and hearing the Word preached on any given Sunday (a total of 2,565 “inactive” members. What are we saying about church discipline and the covenant community we call the local church? Imagine a corporation (if we go that route) where only 4 out of 10 of its employees ever showed up to work. How would it continue to function? So ministerially speaking, the church is comprised of 4,302 members; biblically speaking, the church has 1,737 members.
Conclusion
I could go on, but you do not need more numbers or my analysis to get the point. Numbers do matter - even the ones we cringe to look at and accept. But we must accept them. We must not be “ministerially speaking” but “biblically speaking”. My dean, Dr. Chuck Lawless, has a great blog entitled “Biblical Church Growth,” and I believe that is what we need today. I think it is clear to us all that adding 2,600+ members to one’s church should result in something more like 2,600 regular attenders (roughly speaking), not a decrease of 266 attenders. You see, behind these numbers tell us a lot about how serious we examine our churches, church membership, church discipline, the gospel, conversion, and a whole host of other things that distinctively make us Baptist. But more than being Baptist, we must be biblical, and to be biblical, we must begin with a humble confession and a honest assessment of where we are today. The problems we face will never be solved by denominational politics or presidents or anyone else “ministerially speaking.” They will be solved when we take a look at the Bride of Christ and say, “I will give my life for her that she may be pure, holy, and devoted to Christ our Head.” The reports in heaven will set the record straight, but God forbid that we wait until then to see our great need in the here and now.
It just doesn’t have to be that way, and we don’t just have to be “ministerially speaking” either.
March 21st, 2008 at 8:44 pm
I was so thankful that Timmy Brister originally posted this because it truly gets to the heart of one of the largest problems in the SBC. That problem is integrity in discipleship (and thus who we call disciples). Either we are lying about who is truly becoming a disciple of Christ, or we are doing a horrendous job of brining them into faithful service of Jesus Christ. Either way, this problem needs to be addressed nationally. Of course, no post on this topic is complete without mentioning Tom Ascol, and the work he has done over the years to remind Baptists of the heritage we have in supporting regenerate membership.
March 21st, 2008 at 9:17 pm
You don’t have to go any further than the label itself to smell something badly wrong.
Ministerially speaking?
I was an insurance salesman for 40+ years. Nobody refers to exaggeration as “Sales-speak” that I know of.
Perhaps it’s true what Max Lucado (I think it was) wrote: The ABC’s of church growth are Attendance, Buildings, and Collections. And you already know my opinion of “membership”; I’ve shot my mouth off publicly about that.
“Ministerially speaking” ought to indicate the highest integrity and honesty. But it doesn’t.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:21 pm
I definitely agree with Timmy on this. I was left standing at a mic to speak in defense of Tom Ascol’s resolution last year in San Antonio. My words were going to be rather strong, I am afraid. Perhaps God spared me and the convention from what I was going to say. At any rate, Timmy is right on. Why do we have non-resident members numbering in the thousands for some of our larger churches? That makes no sense. If someone moves away, we don’t count them any longer.
I will offer one defense of churches who baptize a lot but do not necessarily see a large increase in attendance: It is possible that some of those people have moved. We serve a military community and baptize a good number. But, a lot of those people are only here for a year or three and they are then reassigned. We try to give them the perspective that we are sending them out to impact others for Christ. We live in a very transient society and it is unrealistic to think that everyone that we baptize will be with us in 5 years.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:30 pm
There is another word to define “ministerially speaking.” Lying. We are being kind to pastors who exaggerate their numbers by calling it exaggeration. It is lying, plain and simple. And a lot of pastors do it. They lie when they make an illustration personal and its not (I’ve heard the same story told by several different pastors over the years).
Maybe the reason pastors have to lie about how many people are attending their churches, and how many baptisms they are performing, is that they have lied for so long, few people trust them to tell the truth. If you will lie about your numbers, maybe you’re lying about this Jesus thing too.
I loved this article by Timmy Brister. It is time for pastors to start telling the truth in their numbers and in their sermons.
March 21st, 2008 at 11:28 pm
North Metro suffers from what is known in Oklahoma as “Open Range Evangelism” - “rope ‘em, brand ‘em, and let ‘em go”. Faithfully practiced by many-a large church everywhere.
I had one pastor in Southern Oklahoma who was not shy about inflating our Sunday School attendance by 10% each and every Sunday. He “just knew that we missed counting 10% somewhere”. He knew that every week.
Gary
March 22nd, 2008 at 12:16 am
I would love to see Tom Ascol’s resolution pass this year. It would be a sharp scalpel to a central cancer in the SBC: meaningless membership and the resulting pride in inflated numbers. The ultimate solution is a re-centering on the true Gospel, and it seems that this resolution would help redirect the convention toward the Gospel.
What can we do to see it pass??
March 22nd, 2008 at 12:16 am
Having been involved in management in a mega church (15-20,000 give or take..who knows), I can tell you this was the topic of every just about every SR. staff meeting. # of REAL members? # attending? No one knows for sure. That question was a constant battle.
Some people come to the church for years and never actually join. In a mega they are easy to miss. Some members had been gone for years and we never knew. We had people who came to the church but kept their membership at another church! For every 50 going out the back door, 70 new come in the front door. We baptized people we never saw again.
There are thousands who will come for the programs, support groups and events who never attend worship and visa versa.
We tried everything. We even had a membership drive and warned everyone ‘if you did not sign up, you were taken off the roles’. but the numbers went down so bad no one wanted to publish them! We even put sign up computers all over the church so it would be easy to become a member! Yet the attendance did not really change much. Go figure. It is almost impossible to get a good count and one reason why a lot of churches have gone to ‘theatre seats’. You can pack them in like sardines and it is easier to count. We had 2 guys counting each section each service and their count never matched. There were always hundreds milling around the bookstores, coffee shop and foyer during the services. Had they attended the first service or just go to Bible
Study?
I never trust mega numbers. Neither should you.
As a matter of fact, they are really social clubs and job programs for staff’s children. They hardly resemble the true Body of Christ in any way shape or form. I am hoping this American cultural fad passes soon like the mullet or disco. 25 years is long enough. I think we are starting to see the beginnings of just that happening.
March 22nd, 2008 at 12:18 am
This is the kind of post I would like to read more of. Very interesting. Reflections:
1) I would love to see statistical analyses of more churches. The fact that this church was chosen might give some to think there were political considerations. I wonder how much this tendency is reflected in other churches.
2) I wonder what number should be reported? Membership? Meaningless at most churches?
Average attendance? That is not accurate either. A large number in my church have jobs or family plans that mean they don’t attend but once or twice a month, but they are part of the church.
Here are the numbers at my church:
Membership: don’t really know - around 500 to 600?
Average attendance: in the 275 to 300 range per week.
Number of people who attend our church on a monthly basis? I would guess around 400 or maybe 450.
So, maybe that is the most accurate number - people who regularly attend at least once a month.
3) Perhaps the SBC would be good if we agreed to just stop counting numbers (except offerings - those have to be accounted for). Let’s do away with the Annual Church Profile and all public numbers reporting.
They are deceptive, and the lead to “bottom-line” pastoring instead of kingdom-focused ministry.
March 22nd, 2008 at 7:11 am
The other potentially misleading statistic is weekly attendance…..you certainly can’t judge (anymore) a church’s membership from one week’s attendance. It takes about 4-5 weeks for me to see all our active members. People are transient and on the move, running out of town this weekend to visit family, taking a long vacation that weekend…..If all our active members all showed up the same Sunday, we wouldn’t have room for them.
March 22nd, 2008 at 9:55 am
Why are we so obsessed with how many people are coming to our church? Maybe it is the competitive spirit that seems to exist among the type of person who would become a senior pastor (not all senior pastors, but the ones who seem to be type A leaders).
The only number that needs to be counted, as someone has already pointed out, are the offerings. And if we didn’t have to give out tax receipts and know how much to pay the staff, we wouldn’t need to count offerings either.
There is very little honesty in the SBC when it comes to numbers. The easiest way to clean up the problem is to just stop counting.
March 22nd, 2008 at 10:04 am
Here’s what happens at Capitol Hill Baptist Church:
Membership is a little over 500 (attendance over 700), and ever member has their picture and contact info published for the other members to access. This directory is republished every other week because people can be added or dropped this often.
To become a member, a person must attend a 7 week Sunday School class describing the church and what it means to be a member. Then each individual meets with an elder so they can explain their testimony of God’s grace. At the next members’ meeting, all who have had this meeting are presented before the church to be voted on for acceptance. Also at this meeting, members are removed for moving away and joining another church or for the occasional cases of church discipline.
The elders regularly flip through the directory at their meetings and ask who has been missing or unaccounted for. This may lead them to try to find this person and bring them back into the fold, find out what’s wrong or if they’ve moved.
About 5-7 years after Mark Dever got there, he initiated the long process of making the rolls mean something. After at least a year of searching for everyone on the roll, they voted on a couple hundred “members” one by one to be removed from the rolls because no one could find them, or because when they found them they didn’t want to be a member anymore.
Now membership means something at this church. As I understand it, it was a long, tedious process, but now the members know whom they have covenanted with, and the elders know what sheep they have been commissioned to oversee - and they do oversee the flock with great care.
March 22nd, 2008 at 5:02 pm
“If all our active members all showed up the same Sunday, we wouldn’t have room for them.”
I guess that puts a whole new perspective on what it means to be “active”.
Note: The primary worship attendance is reported by the church itself, not an independent researcher (say LifeWay). That number could reflect the previous Sunday or an average over the course of the year. That determination (or variable) is left to the church (at least how I understand it).
March 22nd, 2008 at 8:59 pm
I think you can be an “active” member of a Baptist church and not attend every single Sunday or Wednesday. I have members who travel frequently on business. I interpret “active” to mean those who attend every Sunday they’re in town.
March 22nd, 2008 at 9:37 pm
“I think you can be an “active” member of a Baptist church and not attend every single Sunday or Wednesday. I have members who travel frequently on business. I interpret “active” to mean those who attend every Sunday they’re in town.”
Perhaps like Patterson and Mohler with their home churches? I am sure Mr. Brister would concede they would be considered ‘active members’ even though they are gone quite a bit on ‘business’.
March 24th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Timmy, again thank you for the post and the research.
Bob, Jasonk, and Gary, be careful of attacking the minister’s character or integrity in context of this post.
Gary,
I don’t believe this is indicative of any “large church” epedemic. It is true in smaller churches as well. The only difference is that in the larger church it may equal 1000+ people rather than the 100+ in the smaller church, but the percentage is the same. If you look at the numbers, North Metro’s %40 is actually above the national average of %37.
Jasonk and Bob,
Be careful of interpreting the context of Timmy’s post as “lying” preachers. Though there are some out there, in context his post, once you get past the title, seems to be more about what he believes to be a broken system than lying preachers. I believe the specific example of Dr. Cox, since he is being nominated for Pres of the convention, is more about a broken system than Dr. Cox’s integrity. If there were an integrity problem here the numbers probably would have consistently gone up since 2000. Southern Baptist have traditionally carried more on there rolls and in their membership than in the church due to what it traditionally takes to be removed from the rolls of our churches. If you believe that is broken, then it is the system that is wrong not the individual pastor’s integrity. Be careful of turning an informative post into something that it isn’t.
March 24th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
I also realize that 40% and 37% should be typed as typed here. I am not a complete idiot, I promise…I don’t think I am anyway.
March 24th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
“The 16 million is the number we report to the secular media, and the 6 million is the number we report to God–and that on a good day.”
Dwayne, We are all liars on this issue and we know it. It would be more honest to say we have NO idea who is a REAL member and who isn’t. Yet, we love that 16 million figure to give the the media. We ought to be ashamed and we should quit using it.
I’m not sure I agree with Brister about ‘active’ members. I sometimes have to be gone for up to 2 months at a time. Does that make me forever inactive or just inactive for 2 months?
March 25th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
In the area where I live, one SB church has a reported membership of 200 - I know about 20 attend that church on a given Sunday, and the other SB church has a reported membership of 600 - and they are having a good Sunday if they get 40 or 50. My mother in law is a member of the one with a reported membership of 600. I told her I wondered how many dead people were members of her church. She agreed.