SBCOutpost

The Board of Trustees of the International Mission Board meet this week. It is the first meeting after the election of Johnny Hunt as President of the SBC and the first meeting after the public release of the broadly supported IMB Change statement requesting the rescinding of the controversial IMB guidelines brought to the fore by former IMB Trustee Wade Burleson.

Will the Trustees choose to continue to divide conservative Southern Baptists around tertiary doctrines? Frank Page and Johnny Hunt oppose the guidelines that have created no small furor and plenty of ink, type or computer screen material.

We know that four entity heads oppose them, including Jerry Rankin. We lived without them for a century. They became an issue in the recent election in the BP questionairre. Those who supported the policies were roundly defeated. This is dividing the convention.

Paul Chitwood has called for unity and that is what we need. But that will not come as long as these divisive guidelines are in place. We know, Trustees, that many of you genuinely believe these things. We are not asking you to change your beliefs. We are asking you to return to the BFM as the standard. Listen to Jerry Rankin, Morris Chapman, Frank Page and Johnny Hunt … do it for unity around missions.

Some of us were unable to attend the SBC Annual Meeting in Indianapolis. We are grateful for those who Twittered (Ed Stetzer) and blogged (Tom Ascol and others). Technology allowed many of us to listen in from the outside (like Timmy Brister). Alan Cross may have watched the entire meeting from gavel to gavel. He offers his thoughts in the following piece re-posted here with permission. We offer this post as you anticipate the return of the flag waving Ben Cole.

June 11, 2008

Convention Finale: Does the SBC Have a Future?

My mentor, Dr. Rick Davis, recently suggested the need to check out information posted on blogs for “verification and authentication.” In my previous post I noted Nathan Finn calling attention to the new dynamics the Internet creates for SBC politics. In today’s edition of The Daily Oklahoman religion reporter Carla Hinton wrote a piece titled, “Blogging boosts dialogue.” (The online version of the article is titled, “Southern Baptists’ access to information a click away.”)

Wade Burleson, Wes Kenney and Debbie Kaufman receive press for their participation in blogging. Burleson noted his interest began while serving on the Board of Trustees of the IMB. Most, if not all, Outpost readers would be familiar with Burleson. Hopeful blogging would bring more information, transparency and accountability Burleson began blogging chiefly regarding policy changes at the IMB. Since that time Wade has posted on a variety of subject.

Kenney is one of the four founders of SBCToday according to the article. He too considers the goal of of SBCToday to provide information and a place to dialogue primarily about Baptist identity issues. Comments are moderated and when the moderators consider a comment unhelpful will delete it informing its author.

Kenney took the occasion to point up the difference between the aims of SBCToday and another blog SBCTooDazed. On the one hand those at SBCToday contend for a focus on issues rather than personalities. Kenney suggested SBCTooDazed makes personality the issue. I checked out SBCTooDazed and find it not too dissimilar from early parody sites of SBCOutpost. Anyone remember “Marty binDuren?” In fact, those parody attempts used satire just the same to draw attention to the authors differing perspectives. The parody sites of SBCOutpost were also offered by anonymous authors. We too, the Outpost Team, may eschew the method but I did find the content of SBCTooDazed to, more often than not, address an issue raised by SBCToday once getting past the name changes.

I, like Kenney, may prefer a different forum for discussion. But, I do recall reading those early parody sites to hone my own understanding and hope to get an idea of the author’s particular nuance of an argument or difference of opinion. If someone takes the time to write, it may even be a compliment, though I may not think so.

Debbie Kaufman finds blogs helpful to her understanding of issues in the SBC. She notes a regular regimen of research she hopes will continue to make her a more informed voter.
Doubtless one could spend inordinate time perusing the innumerable SBC blogs. Some write blogs with a narrow focus on SBC issues/politics. Others write with their local church in mind. Still others write for a combination of audiences. Careful reading may indeed offer information worthy of consideration. Conversation, as noted in the previous post, would be a great outcome.

There is little doubt each of these bloggers intend to shape opinion. Any change that comes will be a result of any number of factors - thoughtful content, welcome diversity in conversation, and the receptivity to other ideas by the reader among a host of others.

Recently Nathan Finn wrote a fine piece alerting the SBC to the realities of the Internet. In an even handed manner Finn noted the mediums used to chart a new course in the SBC by those who used, “computer mailing lists” and the like. Some recall “Town Hall” styled meetings and “Whistle Stop” tours rallying troops to stand with the assertive new leaders to stem the tide of liberalism, rescue the denomination and ensure the authority of the Scriptures. Enter Al Gore’s “Internet” and look out. Conference calls and snail mail fliers cannot compete with the speed of a DSL connection, a chat program and yes, one’s own website.

These developments give anyone, including me, an occasion to opine about something, anything. Occasionally good questions will be asked and, though not often enough, healthy conversation ensues.

Yesterday while listening to KOSU, Sooner fans don’t excoriate me, an opinion piece was aired drawing attention to the influence of the postmodern mood on our culture. The speaker considers the incessant, and petulant, chasing after conspiracy theories to be something of an expression of the loss of truth to “my truth.” Critiques in our quarters, Southern Baptist that is, regarding postmodern philosophy and its influential mood often point up the loss of meaning for a given text. Or, to put it another way, rather than let the text speak we seem to practice the literary theory to have emerged from or within the postmodern shift, namely “Reader-Response Theory.”

The assumed meaning of the text shifted from what the author may have intended to the reader’s interpretive framework - preconceptions, psychological proclivities and long-held biases. Many who read here at the Outpost, and many who say they don’t but do, want very much to rest in the perspicuity of Scripture - that is, there is a plain meaning of the text. Authorial intent and its form hold what is needed. Yet, since words are on the screen you our faithful readers and detractors will decide for yourselves what is said and what is intended. It is always a risk someone will “mis-read” or “mis-interpret” what is being typed.

I recently wrote a piece here describing my thoughts on recent Lifeway research. One interlocutor determined I lay claim to “Kreskin” like skills and wrote a piece asserting I knew the hidden motive of another thereby questioning my motives. Imagine my shock and amazement, not to mention un-mitiaged belief, that same writer who finds the Outpost a great source of material, writes a response to the recent Rodney Hammer letter released by The Biblical Recorder snooping as it were among the paragraphs and sentences for a conspiracy to expose. That’s right, Rodney Hammer looks to bring down the IMB by making his opinion public and asserting the need to re-think policy. Having sought to express himself to the point of reprimand, he wrote to me, to us, to say “I am concerned.” If the best someone can do is come along and look for a conspiracy in accountability then said person has way too much time on their hands. Furthermore, if this is the best kind of defense, we in Okie land call it “mis-direction” recalling the bygone days of the amazing “Wishbone” era of Sooner Football, critics and the like have to offer then “Nashville, we have a problem.”

Let me make my motives clear. I hold no animosity for another who seems given to twist the obvious. I simply believe that when a man stands on his convictions and is willing to take the heat in the public square then we must listen to his words and not to the ruminations or imaginations of another. Yes, yes, dear reader you will comb the archives being sure to note every instance where we here at the Outpost may have done the same. So before you do it, “Shame on us.” If we have attributed motives to another without proper verification we stand under your scrutinizing eye. But, if we have knowledge of another’s motive and for whatever reason determine not to share it - yes, I am invoking the reality of anonymity here - you will have to take extra Rolaids at what will appear to you a contradiction.

My hope, read “motive,” is that we could really engage in honest, healthy conversation. Calling someone’s motive into question, assuming we know the strength of another’s “ecclesiology” based solely on a comment in a post thread, or ramping up our rhetoric charging ecumenism or the loss of inerrancy to hijack an otherwise honest attempt at dialog is in view. No hidden agenda here. No attempt to subvert what it means to be a Baptist.

Oh, and while I am at it, there is little credibility in slamming Ben Cole, or referring to him in dark terms. Your cries and laments fall helplessly on deaf ears when you claim to want to engage in honest conversation. For our dear critics, like a good addict, you return driving site statistics with your curiosity as to who will slam Ben next or what “juicy” post will follow. Posts offering thoughtful ideas and interjections into the future of the SBC, denominations and the like to you are as boring and uneventful as watching paint dry. So, let’s, in the motive of this post, have an honest conversation. We like to read the tabloid stuff. Our leaders were masters of the invective. They could rally the troops with just the right euphemisms whether or not they accurately described the situation and or person or not.

So, the motive of this post - call attention to Rodney Hammer’s words. Read them understanding his concerns only serve as a tip of the proverbial iceberg. Southwestern Alums recently received their fund-raising letters asking for contributions to keep the lights on. Is it increasing or decreasing enrollment? We here at the Outpost often receive communiques from the mission field noting a lack of resources for “evangelism” and matters they are not to speak of but are certainly causing a great deal of discomfit and interruption in service. Let’s not spin this one. No amount of posturing is going to solve our dilemmas. Open and honest conversation will be the way forward.

I hope I have illustrated that. With that, I point you to Hammer’s letter.

The Biblical Recorder posted the full letter from Rodney Hammer which had been leaked in “bits” around the Internet according to the Recorder. We direct your attention to the letter with no commentary on the content.

Interrupted for breaking news we continue Marty “Carmen Sandiego” Duren’s series we have themed, “Where is the SBC?” Since Marty dropped off the Outpost map some conjectured his displeasure with the Outpost. Instead, Marty has been living out of the reality he now experiences and is writing here in part 2.

We’re Not Who We Thought We Were.

One of the more replayed video clips over the last few years was that of NFL head coach Dennis Green of the Arizona Cardinals. Following a loss to the Chicago Bears in 2006, which his team had led 24-3 in the fourth quarter, came the inevitable press conference. An obviously ticked Green exploded like a man who’d been celebrating Cinco de Mayo for a month. “The Bears are who we thought they were,” has become a favorite line for sports fans ever since. What Green was saying was, “They had nothing on us. They were the team we prepared for and we let them off the hook. We should have won the game.” It was slightly more colorful in the original language.

In thinking through this series, the word “disintegration” was intentionally chosen over the word “collapse.” I do not think that we will wake up one morning in the next year to find that the United Methodists, the Lutherans, Episcopalians (in their various stripes) or SBC will have closed the doors and shuttered the windows. I do think that we will continue to see decreasing viability of meaningful gospel influence in these organizations to the point that, like water against a rock, the slow erosion results in an unstable foundation and eventual cessation of denominational existence.

Linked in Ed Stetzer’s warning shot were two papers by J. Clifford Tharp, Jr. one with the following chart indicating “Total Membership” and “Resident Membership.”

Tharp’s brief analysis included these three points: 1. Trends in Membership (both Total and Resident) are becoming very flat; 2. Total Membership is dangerously close to beginning to decrease; 3. The gap between Total Membership and Resident Membership is widening. Observant readers will notice that if the top line flattens and the gap between the two widens, then necessarily the bottom line is beginning or continuing a downward arc. On this chart, that means that Resident Membership is decreasing. As we know and will soon reconsider, Resident Membership itself is a misleading measure of biblical membership and should not be considered an accurate accounting.

We’re not who we thought we were.

A second chart (below) tracks SBC baptisms from 1950-2004.

As you can see, baptisms have remained virtually static for more than 1/2 a century (there is a minuscule increase of 45 per year). The US population in 1950 was 152,271,417. Non-stop growth brought us to 281,421,906 by the year 2000. In a non-scientific but well thought through series of observations, Nathan Finn suggests that the Southern Baptist Convention is probably reaching no more than 100,000 “unreached Americans” per year while in their book, “Who Will Be Saved?,” Paul House and Greg Thornbury write:

Statistics compiled by the North American Mission Board…reveal that as many as half of all adults baptized in Southern Baptist churches are rebaptisms of persons already baptized by Southern Baptist pastors. Another 40 percent of adults baptized are Christians from other denominations who have never been immersed. Only ten percent of all adults baptized in Southern Baptist churches are making first-time professions of faith.

And this from what is widely considered the most evangelistic denomination in the U.S.

We’re not who we thought we were.

In her new book, The Fall of the Evangelical Nation, Christine Wicker takes both Southern Baptists and evangelicals to task for their faulty reporting of their actual membership totals. She notes, for example, that:

Only 7 percent of members who’ve been in a Southern Baptist church five years of less are true converts, meaning sinners who weren’t raised in the church but came through a profession of faith in Jesus. If you took out the Southern Baptists who married unbelievers and brought them to faith, hardly anybody would be left.

Behind the thesis is that there are not nearly as many committed, Bible believing, Bible following Christians in American as we have all been led to believe, the former Dallas Morning News writer (and former Southern Baptist) pegs SBC active membership at just north of four million. Though Wicker finds herself somewhere between an agnosticism and an reluctant atheisism, her understanding of what genuine church membership should be is decent. She refuses to acknowledge that the SBC consists of 16+ million members, stating, “How many members a church has is a pretty worthless measure of reality…[only] about two-thirds are even residents of the same town as the churches they belong to.”

We’re not who we thought we were.

Not content with exposing the SBC’s lack of clothing, Wicker also points out that the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) does not have its claimed and oft trumpeted 30 million members. There are sixty denominations that make up the membership of the NAE including the Assemblies of God, Church of God, Church of the Nazarene and the Evangelical Free Church of America. According to Wicker’s research, the total membership of the fifty member denominations listed in the Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches 2007, the American Religion Statistical Archives and the denominations’ own Web sites the grand total of the members is 7.6 million people. Active membership would be much less–less than half actually. So, what of the elusive 30 million count we’ve all heard. No one, not even NAE president Leith Anderson knows for sure. The 1990 NAE record listed only 4.5 total members.

We’re not who we thought we were.

What does this mean? Is the issue a matter of simple math? No. The issue is that, not only have we been well behind the population growth curve, we didn’t have as great a number in the starting blocks as we had been led to believe. Since every age group of baptisms is decreasing except those who are under five years old and since the number of those graduating from high school and leaving church is increasing and since the ranks of admitted unbelievers is the fastest growing “faith” category in the US, there simply are not going to be enough people to keep denominations, which are dependent on heavy financial investment, afloat. As denominationally oriented church members age and die (and they already are) younger people will not give tithes to churches that insist on supporting failing bureaucracies, thus leading further down the Post Denominational road.

We’re not who we thought we were.

One of the young pastors I have come to know over the last couple of years is Alan Cross. He blogs at Downshoredrift. Alan has led his church to partner in India. He takes an active role in his local association. And, Alan wonders about the SBC drift - a drift into relativism.

In 2004 Jimmy Draper sensed the graying of the SBC. He called leaders to take an initiative to engage and encourage young leaders. Intent to do as he suggested Draper planned a Road Trip stopping in a number of cities to share a conversation with those who would. Paul and I attended one of these “listening sessions” at the First Baptist Church, Broken Arrow, Oklahoma. Unsure of what constituted “young” in “young leader,” we found the conversations interesting to say the least. There is little doubt some things encouraged Dr. Draper while others confirmed his concern.

Several years ago I was invited to preach out our State Pastor’s Conference. I was the “young” preacher. I caught the early session, the one before the big hitters show up. I stayed for the meeting and told a couple of our staff members that if we continued as we were, it would not be long before our Pastor’s Conference became extinct. The issue was not the preaching. Rather the event illustrated the same statistics offered by Lifeway regarding the age of SBC Annual Meeting messengers/attendees. The number of “young” pastors/preachers may have scraped 15% of those in attendance. [I want to be quick to note, we have great fellowship and some solid preaching at our Pastor’s Conferences. My comments are not intended to denigrate our efforts at bringing challenging speakers to our events. Instead, the intent is to illustrate the dearth of young pastors in terms of percentage of attendance.] That is how I was introduced to the changing world of SBC denominational debate.

Recently, the ACP report indicated a membership decline. Several days after everyone seemed to agree there was a problem, few would disagree we are losing many young leaders, and most agree we need a plan for unity, Paige Patterson shows up with a long, rambling, analysis, swinging at everyone. (Is this the longest First Person ever, coming in at over 1800 words?)

Pay careful attention to the word games. Up to this point few would run from CR as Conservative Resurgence. Dr. Patterson chooses to recast the conversation in terms of a “Conservative Renaissance.” Not enough to quibble for most but a definite attempt to seize the conversation. Four “culprits” take the blame for the “decline” that is really not a decline. Occasionally willing to note direct correlations cannot be made, Dr. Patterson implies he has a handle on the declining numbers.

One of the more amusing moments is when Dr. Patterson takes a swipe at Dr. Frank Page. Frank is quoted in the Associated Press saying Baptists are often seen as mean spirited. (Does anyone really disagree with this????) A Google Search revealed only Dr. Frank Page is quoted describing the SBC as often seen as “mean-spirited.” Here at the Outpost are surprised Will Hall of Baptist Press and his boss Morris Chapman would allow the President of one of our seminaries to attack the President of the SBC in this manner. We believe such an action should merit an apology and a retraction. After all, it was agreed our entity heads would not attack one another.

Paige Patterson responds:
Is it also “mean-spirited” to make broad imprecise allegations of “mean-spiritedness”? Are some who make these charges guilty themselves?

Did he just say, “I’m rubber, your glue?” to Frank Page?

Nice.

Patterson objects to the loss of young leaders, asking if they were really ever “of us?” Are we to assume, since Patterson cites 1 John 2:19, that he believes people like Andy Stanley (and many many others) have left the faith—that they are not “of us.” I hope not. And, should we assume here that he is refuting the claims and emphases of men like Stetzer, Draper, and others. Again, I hope not.

Evidently we have a case of, “He said, He said.”

So who wins the day? Some will immediately defer to Dr. Patterson. After all, we owe him a debt for saving the SBC that is not in decline. We owe those who form the inner circle of the SBC a measure of respect for the blood on their swords to rid the SBC of those liberals.

Except in the same day BP is releasing the First Person piece by Patterson we also find Johnny Hunt will be nominated to be President of the SBC in Indianapolis. Ted Traylor will nominate Hunt. Two of the three reasons Traylor outlined for nominating Hunt turned on the issue of young leaders and unity. Evidently Traylor and others believe young leaders are indeed disinterested, if not leaving the SBC. And, rather than looking for gremlins and ghosts, some believe there is a need to unify around the Gospel, that there really is division in the SBC. (Can anyone guess where at least some of that division originates?)

So, you see, it is a, “He said, He said,” matter. Either Dr. Patterson’s analysis is correct, or Stetzer, Draper, Traylor, Page, Hunt, Aikin, Rainer, George, Dockery among others see the recent news as a clarion call not to call ghostbusters, but to face the facts. As with all things Baptist – you get to be the judge.

Pathways is reporting Avery Willis will be nominated by John Marshall in Indiana to be the next President of the SBC. No wait, word is out Johnny Hunt will also be nominated. Three. Four. Five. Some seem to be forgetting Wiley Drake.

1985. Some mark 1985 as something of a watershed in the survival of the Conservative Resurgence. It was the year of the Peace Committee appointment (the report came in 1987). It was the year of the Battle in Big D. It served the high water mark for messenger registration - more than 45,000.  It was the year the New York Times reported it unlikely the two groups vying for control of the SBC would find a way forward together. It was the year of the re-election of Charles Stanley. It was the year. It was the year of, “Where In the World is Carmen Sandiego?”

Marty Duren was a young lad - in his mid 20’s. Who knows where he was geographically or historically. In fact, who knew Marty Duren? Who cared? After Jimmy Draper’s alert the SBC was losing young leaders, Marty emerged as an interested “young leader.” Once the Lifeway message board devolved into something of a pointless exercise in the way forward Steve McCoy and Marty Duren initiated blogs of their own.

Marty is the originator of SBCOutpost.com. Too often critics assume Marty’s withdrawal from regular contributions to the Outpost signaled a separation from anyone who sought to keep the Outpost viable and alive. Recently, it was reported the Outpost would soon be defunct. Should the Outpost ever cease it will come on the back of sentiments similar to what Marty will explicate in a series he began today at ie:missional. Detractors, Baptist Identity constituents, and many others will break open a soda and celebrate if we ever fade into the history of Baptist blogs. Some of us believe those who need a fight need the Outpost. Something like the fact that Rush Limbaugh needs a Clinton in the White House.

So, with that lengthy introduction we will re-post Marty’s series here with permission. We will learn, “Where In the World is Marty Duren?”

The Impending Disintegration of American Denominationalism

Posted by: Marty Duren in Church, Culture, God, Gospel, Life, Mission, Missional, News

Ten months ago when I began this blog, I purposed not to engage in discussion about the denomination in which I have pastored, the Southern Baptist Convention, unless it crossed paths with a subject about which I was writing. This is one of those times.

A recent report from missiologist Ed Stetzer of Lifeway Christian Resources indicated that the Southern Baptist Convention, once characterized (because of its cultural dominance) as the Roman Catholic Church of the southern United States, has entered a downward trend of growth which, he predicts, may not turn around. If you are among those who haven’t yet, you can read the initial report here and the follow up article here.

As would have been expected, the report was hailed in some places (see Ed’s comment threads) and questioned in others. The question that does not seem to have been asked during this is simple: Has the time for heavily organized, bureaucratically inefficient denominational structures passed? My thesis is a simple one and flows from what I see happening:

The era of denominationalism is ending, therefore, time and energy spent attempting to revive them is not redeemed time.

Rather than reviving them, we should be having a planned euthanization. I will not be arguing “post-denominational” in the sense of personal preference or lack thereof, but “Post-Denominationalism” in the sense of no SBC, UMC, PCUSA, etc.

Though Stetzer’s commentary is specific to growth patterns in the SBC, all other denominations in the United States are and have been in decline with the single exception of the Assemblies of God which counts but 2.8 million members (2005). Even the respected National Association of Evangelicals has lost some of its luster since the fall of Ted Haggard, though, as we will see, it never had quite as much luster as was thought. Regardless of the denomination none have matched, via conversions, the growth rate of the population (excepting possibly the AoG), so in percentage of population terms all American denominations have been in decline for decades. At best, a few denominations have grown at the expense of others, the common scenario known as “swapping sheep.”

Is the motivation to “save the denomination” a good enough motivation to go into hyper-drive in funds promoting or doomsday scenarios? I don’t think so. When Jesus said to the people of Jerusalem, “Behold, your house [the temple] has been left to you desolate,” He was warning them that there system of belief was coming to an end. There were no more sacrifices needed, no more pouring out of animal blood, no more Day of Atonement; it was over. Their mistake was that they continued to cling to a structure that God Himself had abandoned. Shall we repeat the same mistake?

Writing with an eye to the Southern Baptist Convention, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary prof, Nathan Finn, recently asked:

So does the SBC have a future? It depends upon what you mean by “future.” I suspect the name will be used by some Baptists until Christ comes back. I also think the people called Southern Baptists will always have denominational entities that they financially support. So in one sense, I remain confident that Southern Baptists are here to stay. But if by “future” one means a vital existence in God’s economy, I have my doubts. Collectively, I fear we are too insular, too sectarian, too pugnacious, too “Southern,” too reactionary, too pragmatic, and for sure too proud to have any real future.

While I appreciate Nathan’s balanced thinking, I, for one, am not convinced that any denomination is here to stay and am convinced that the era, like the telegraph, is passing into the historical record and that we have entered the Post-Denominational (PD) era.

Commenting on Ed Stetzer’s original post, SEBTS prof Alvin Reid noted,

For several semesters I have asked our students “how many of you came from an SBC church?” The vast majority. Then I ask, “How many of you want to go back and serve a church just like that?” Almost none. These are seminarians, the ones we still have, and they see a serious need for change. Again, this is anecdotal and simplistic, but here is another idea–have someone do a survey of current seminarians to find out who they listen to on podcasts? Might be revealing.

This is not merely true of the SBC as other denominations are dealing with the same issues. No one is important enough to have cornered the market here.

Also responding to Stetzer was SEBTS president, Danny Akin, who said,

I could not agree with your assessment more! I go to bed thinking about this every night and wake up the same.We are in serious trouble. Our denomination is at a crisis moment and we will either repent, seek the forgiveness and mercy of God and perhaps experience a true and genuine revival from our Lord, or we will continue our present course and simply fade away with the Lord Jesus justly removing His hand of blessing.

But what if no amount of repentance and seeking of forgiveness will bring revival and revitalization to the SBC or any other denomination? What if, like the sacrificial system, their time has run it’s course and God is preparing a new thing? I pray that it will be embraced rather than feared.

Over the next few posts, I will be exploring why I think we will continue down the road toward a Post-Denominationalism world. We’ll see that the SBC and evangelicals have not had either the numbers or the power that we’ve thought and will continue to lose both in the US; that the Kingdom of God is shifting again (as it has before) this time from dominance in the West; and that technology has rendered the need for heavily bureaucratic, densely centralized, financially profligate organizational structures obsolete and that the lessening of the influence of denominations in culture will be inversely proportional to the influence of local churches networking in culture.

In late February the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma hosted its second Missional Ministry Conference. One of the featured speakers, Ed Stetzer, offered illustration of recent Lifeway Research during a breakout session. During the Q and A he sought to break down some of the technical features of statistical analysis for we average folks. I was left thinking it may be good to include a course in statistics for seminary students - and so we pastors.

I, like many pastors, tend to watch “trends.” For example, one of the trends I have watched over the past five or so years is attendance. Now that is not to imply some kind of weird disinterest in previous years. Instead, I began noticing attendance patterns changing in our church. I will go out on a limb and say ours is not the only church where attendance has “leveled” after a period of growth while we have continued to see additions to our membership over the years. Since we place such an emphasis upon the size of a church in order to imbue another with a sense of honor and prestige it is nigh impossible for we pastor types to leave attendance concerns to someone else. Why, when news breaks about a potential SBC President, it seems we always find mention of the size of church and the kind of growth of said church during the tenure of the “prestigious” pastor. But, I digress.

Growing up in an SBC church meant gauging “regular” attendance by weekly attendance. Over these past five years or so I have found we may need to re-think “regular” attendance. I cannot recall where I read it but it seems that we (SBC) have even adjusted our ruler for “regular” attendance to twice a month, and maybe even monthly. What do these patterns mean? We self-conscious types wonder what we may have done, who we may have neglected, what we have forgotten. After all, when attendance flags the most dreaded description has become, “plateaued or declining.” Yet, I wonder how often that particular category denigrates the work of a local congregation because analysts fail to take into account a host of factors involved in any given local context. When we see the trends we ratchet up our rhetoric and cast about for ways to invigorate and inspire to new heights (read: numbers).

Read the rest of this entry »