Closing the Back Door (Part 1)
I’ve had an email exchange with Lindy, the editor of Outreach Magazine in recent days. She gave me permission to share our exchange. I’ll try to keep this as concise as possible. These are the highlights. (I’m pretty confident this one is going to get me into trouble.)
Lindy: The No. 1 challenge the readers of Outreach Magazine say they face is closing the back door or effectively connecting people to the church… I know you know churches. So If you’ve heard about, visited or led a church that’s highly effective in this area, please e-mail me.
Tony: You probably don’t want my thoughts on trying to design ministry to keep people from leaving. Honestly, I think that’s why most of our churches in America are in decline.
Lindy: I’m interested in what you’re saying… Are you saying that churches shouldn’t focus on “closing the back door” or bringing people deeper into the life of the church?
Tony: I’m saying the vast majority of churches are solely focused on keeping the people that already attend their church. Rather than designing ministry to reach new people, the focus is on keeping the people that already attend. Think about the typical church. List all the church programs/ministries/events in two columns. Label one column “for people who are already here” and the second column “for people who aren’t here yet.” For the typical church (including churches that the world sees as being seeker-sensitive), almost all of their programs, money, staffing, etc. are focused on providing ministry for the people who are already convinced that Jesus is our Lord and Savior.
If you agree with that, then you have to ask the question: “Does it matter if people leave a church to find another church where they can go deeper or be fed more?” In the big picture, I would argue that it doesn’t really matter to God where people grow. And, in my opinion, there are already lots of churches that are designed to, at their best, disciple Christians, and at their worst, keep Christians happy. There are very few churches, though, that are truly missional in words and in actions. There are few churches that are designed to do whatever it takes to reach the lost. That concerns me because I’m convinced it really matters to God that there are people who are lost and separated from him.
To be continued…
Well put. I heard Perry Noble speak up at Granger last year and he hit a home run when speaking on this very topic. The work comes when you try to steer an already established “for Christians” church in a direction that basically tells them that your main concern isn’t them. It’s possible to do and we are trying to do our best, but sure as heck isn’t easy. It takes work…lots of it…oh, and thick skin and a great conviction for what you are doing help…
But what about us churches that are far too stacked on the other side (ie: programming and resources dedicated to the newcomer/new journeyer/unchurched/whatever the hip lingo is nowadays)? Say you have a steady stream of first-time attenders each and every week. What do you do with them? How do you do follow-up? How do you get them assimilated into the life of the church? How do you grow them up spiritually?
great, great thread here
one of models that we seem to have lost in our go-go, drive-in church world is that of a parish, from the Greek ????? = “house”. a parish is a geographical unit – what meant be thought of as a neighborhood or sud-division nowadays. a church building is a centered point for worship in that parish – pastors work in the parish, not simply in the church building.
my only push-back on your great thoughts is at the very end. what is your definition of “the lost” ? i suspect you do not mean surviving passengers of Oceanic Flight 815 living on a seemingly deserted tropical island.
If our ‘mission’ is to make disciples, then how could being ‘missional’ not include both evangelism and edification? When did the emphasis become primarily one or the other?
I’ve recently been reading Organic Church, and while I have not had time to prayerfully consider everything that is in there, one thing struck me that seems to relate to this discussion:
Jesus told us in Matthew 13 to expect those that hear the word to leave, get distracted, or not like the battles that come with it. This means that we must be willing to let some in our local church walk away until they are ready.
I agree with Tony to the point that churches should leave the back door open. Let those that are not serious about committing to Jesus move on, as there is plenty of ripe fields for us to harvest without spending our time dealing with those that are riding the fence.
To Tony’s point as well, those that are in a strong relationship with Jesus will follow the direction of the Spirit to whatever local church body He would call them to – if we try and block the door, we are simply fighting against their calling.
I tend to agree that if we are going to err in any way, it should be in showing people THE WAY, THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE, so that they can experience freedom in Christ. In that context, those who already follow Christ can learn and relearn even the most basic ways to live like Him. Depth is overrated, especially when we generally don’t even get the easy stuff. For those who have mastered the basics, the responsibility is really on them (not the church) to go deeper in their faith.
Good point on the “For us” vs. “For people who need to hear the message” ministries. I don’t think I even want to look at our list right now. I have a pretty strong guess which way the scales would tilt. :(
I can say that we ditched our VBS this year in an attempt to try something different to reach unchurched kids. I don’t know how well it’s working, but it’s something that I’m glad we’re trying. Bring on more of that and I think we’ll be moving in the right direction.
While not disagreeing with your over all point, I see an assumption here that I want to point out.
Is everyone out the back door a believer?
Still, agreeing in principle with your post, I want to ask another question.
Isn’t our biggest program, the one that gets most of the time and most of the attention the worship service? I would say that a larger number of evangelical churches put an emphasis on the unsaved in the worship service. The other programs rely upon it.
Finally, still very OK with what you are saying, I want to ask a thrid question.
Is everyone out the back door making a conscious choice to leave because they want to grow and feel they aren’t growing? Are there other reasons they leave? Are any of those reasons worth exploring?
I’m fortunate to work and minister in a church, like NewSpring, that focuses on those who have yet to hear the Good News that Jesus Saves us from our sin and reconciles us to God! I say fling the back door wide for those who won’t eat meat (or grow spiritually).
The issue at hand is what do people do when they find Christ. If they are taught that part of going deeper in Christ is doing what He taught, as well as studing the Word, both will be accomplished. One without the other is incorrect. You must obey Jesus who told us to go and tell others about Himself. We must know Him to do so. If your church only feeds, then you have a fat and unhealthy church. If all they do is gather folks who are seeking but have no depth then your church is lean with no root structure. Fat becomes territorial and ugly. I’d take on fire and shallow anytime. You can teach folks to go deeper. The heart change for the lost is much more difficult.