The Turn-Around Church Challenge: Will you take The First Step to Turn Around Your Church?

Face it. Most congregations are declining or plateaued in attendance and membership. While some churches flourish, the attendance and participation in most churches has been diminishing for years. Some churches seem to be holding their own as they work hard to stay at the same attendance level. Many churches that are growing are doing so through transfer growth. That happens when people who are already Christians move into your church from another congregation. Transfer growth is relatively easy. It may take nothing more than having a better show than the church down the street. It’s a good thing if Christians transfer to your church because they have recently moved into the area. It’s not that great if the transfers come because they are disaffected or disappointed by the church down the street. Transfer growth, while it may feel good and look good in the statistics, does little or nothing to extend the Kingdom of God. It is far inferior to growth by evangelism. That’s when people who don’t know Christ become Christ-followers and identify with your church. Way too many churches haven’t had that kind of growth in years.

Turning a church around is very difficult. The hardest part is to get the people to want to turn around. Sometimes they know their congregation is in trouble. They see the empty pews. They realize that most of the congregation is made up of old people and that every funeral further diminishes the ranks. They are alarmed, but not alarmed enough to do the things that it would take to return their church to health. These diminishing churches die slowly. Their death is slowed because they either have a lot of money in the bank that they can slowly spend on safe things that enable them to get by, or they lure a naïve pastor to work there for nothing. They convince the pastor that he will be able to turn the church around and they will help him. Too often the congregation not only does nothing to help him, they stand in the way of the changes the pastor tries to initiate. If they make any changes, they are only small ones around the edges that only serve to extend the dying process.

The first step, the most critical step, for a church to turn around or get off a plateau is to admit their condition and seek help. They have to realize that it will probably take radical changes for the church to return to health. Long time church members have to willingly make those changes. They have to accept that the changes will probably be uncomfortable and things won’t be like they have always been. The changes will make them uncomfortable, but they need to become more uncomfortable with the fact that people are going to hell that they could be reaching. These long-time Christ followers need to become more desperate to let God use them to build His Kingdom than they are for their church to stay the way it has always been. The desire for their church to return to being a place where lives are changed and people find Christ must override the desire for “the good old days.” They need to begin to see their church and their community from God’s point of view. Finally, they need to be brokenhearted over the opportunities they have missed to reach people with the Gospel, and dedicate themselves to seeing that happens no more.

God sent His Son into the world to die for our salvation; that had to be uncomfortable. Jesus died a horrible death on the cross; that couldn’t have been comfortable. The early Christ followers suffered sever persecution, torture and death; no way that was comfortable. Yet many church people today are unwilling to sacrifice their comfort for the souls of people they can reach with Gods’ help. Church people need to resolve to become Kingdom builders. That means to choose to do whatever God asks of them to help Him build His Kingdom in their community.

It’s time to step up to the challenge to be witnesses. It’s time as the old hymn says, “be done with lesser things.” It’s time for the church to rise up. The world desperately needs our Savior and His love, hope and salvation.

Names of Churches

What’s in a name?  What’s in a name for a church?

A new church is meeting at a high school near my house.  It is called Kingdom Come.  Interesting name.  I haven’t yet found out why this name was chosen, and I am sure there must have been a good reason, but I am having fun thinking about what that name means.  It probably has to do with a verse from the Lord’s Prayer, or about wishing Jesus would come back.  But what do people driving by the sign in front of the school think it means.  Most people use the words “kingdom come” in a sentence like, “The tornado (or hurricane, or explosion) blew that house to kingdom come.”  So, is this church explosive, or the aftermath of an explosion? Or, perhaps the church members know that the Hebrew word for spirit is the same as the word for wind, so they are very poetically thinking that the Spirit is blowing in the church until the Kingdom comes.  The problem is that the Bible says:

Jesus replied, “The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:20-21, NIV).

To me that says the Kingdom is already here.  

Anyway, I don’t want to argue Kingdom of God theology at this time; instead, this post is about church names. 

I find them very interesting.  Historically, we have named churches for a saint or other leader, for a biblical place, for a doctrinal position, or a combination of these.  Some churches are named for the area or the street on which they are located.  Sometimes, that creates problems when the church relocates.  When I was a young student minister in Louisville, KY, the biggest church in town was Walnut St. Baptist Church: it was located on Broadway and had been for many years.  The First Church of God in Wichita, KS was pretty much in the middle of town when it changed its name to Central Community Church.  A couple of years later they moved to what was then the west edge of town and kept the name.  (Central Community has a sister church named West Side.  West Side is now 5 miles closer to the middle of the city than is Central—confusing.)  It has also long been the practice for churches to use numbers to identify themselves.  Usually, the only number they use is First, but I have seen a few Seconds.

Some churches that started in the 70s and 80s, perhaps inspired by 7Up’s uncola commercials chose to use an unchurch name.  They took names like Christian Fellowship, or Koinonia, or Ekklesia and left out the word “Church” … I guess to show they were different from your Grandma’s church.  Also, in that period lots of churches put “Community” in their names:  Faith Community, Fellowship Community, Ourtown or Our Neigborhood Community.  Many of these were inspired by Robert Schuller who chose not to name the church he founded Reformed Church of Garden Grove, but instead, Garden Grove Community Church.  His purpose was to identify with the people of the town.  Of course, when they built an amazing building, the name was changed to Crystal Cathedral.  Hmm … that church, which for decades was one of the most influential ones in the country, recently declared bankruptcy.  I wonder if the emphasis, like the name, turned from the community to the church.  I don’t know about that particular case, but I know that a lot of other churches have turned inward, which has led to their downfall.

In the last 10 or 15 years the fad has been for churches to choose a one word name that somehow describes the mission, so we now have churches named Journey, Catalyst, Discover, Hope, or _______pointe (fill in the blank with Life, Bridge, Faith, Touch). 

There are also some very unusual names for newer churches.  Last week I heard a speaker from Australia whose church is named Small Boat, Big Sea.  It’s located in a depressed area and wants to bring God’s rescue to the people there, at least that’s what I think it means.  Also, there is a church in Denver, CO that is called Scum of the Earth.  No kidding.  They are targeting people who feel rejected by everyone.  A good thought, but I think it might limit their clientele. Perhaps that’s the idea, and they are only interested in reaching that niche which they feel is being rejected by other churches.  I can’t help being reminded of a youth pastor friend of mine who, when we were young, was fond of saying he was going to move to Beverly Hills because he felt called to minister to the filthy rich.  I wonder how the name Church of the Filthy Rich, or Rich and Famous Community Church would have worked out.  Maybe it’s just as well he never went there.

Some church leaders are saying churches should think about changing the name every five years.  I don’t know about that.  It seems to me if a church has a reputation for being a loving community that welcomes and accepts new people, a name change is probably unnecessary and may be counterproductive.  However, if a church which has been declining or on a long plateau because it has become inward focused is choosing to turn over a new leaf, repent, and seek to have an outward focused future, then a name chance should be considered.  The new name can reflect the new life the church is now living.  Changing the name won’t change the focus, but if the focus is changing, then changing the name can make sense. 

Naming the church is a big decision.  I had the privilege of naming a church that I planted.  It was the middle 80s and I wanted to name it Hope Community Church.  (Basically, because we had little money, little training as a church planter, no people, and hope was the only resource we had.)  When I shared the name with the congregation, which at that point was my wife, my 6-year-old son and myself, the vote was 2 to 1.  My wife was fine with Hope, but my little son, being wise beyond his years, said, “Name it Jesus’s Church, because it’s His church anyway.”  I learned right then that naming a church causes controversy in any size church.  Of course, Jarad’s statement was correct, but Dad and Mom won and we named it Hope Community anyway.  As I think about it, perhaps Jesus’ Church would be a pretty good name.  Maybe it would help a body of believers to remember who is in charge and keep the focus on Him and his design for His church. 

What’s in a name?  For a church there can be a lot, especially in this day when people are less and less impressed by denominational and doctrinal names.  I think the name should reflect what the church aspires to be and the mission it hopes to accomplish.  Is your church living up to its name?  Beyond that, is it living up to the mission that Jesus gave it?

Why are Churches Dying?

Perhaps the scariest word in the English language is change. It plunges us from the security of the customary into the unknown. It threatens to take us to strange places and surround us with the unfamiliar. Change causes fear and contention in the church. People count on their church being something they can rely on, something that remains stalwart in the midst of all the craziness of a swiftly moving life and a constantly changing culture. As the old saying goes, “The only one who likes change in the church is the wet baby in the nursery.” Yet, it is in this culture and at this time that the church needs to make necessary changes in order to build God’s Kingdom by reaching this generation. Young ministers and young members are calling for different ministries, different priorities, different buildings and different organizational structures.

The need for change comes from more than the restlessness of a new generation.Churches are dying. In too many cases, church members will hang on to the familiar and watch their church die rather than make, or even allow, the changes that are necessary for it to bring new people to Christ. The church must always stay in tune with the times. After all, our God himself is eternally contemporary. In Exodus chapter 3 He told Moses that his name is “Yahweh” which means “I am.” Not “I was,” not “I will be,” but “I am.” God was then, and always has been, in the present tense. We do not serve Him by trying to preserve the past. The great saints and their accomplishments should be celebrated, but it is not our task to duplicate their work; instead, we must build on it. The methods we use to extend their work may be very different from theirs, but our goal is the same— to make Christ known.

This resistance to change has become so great that many young pastors are choosing to go through the hardships of planting a new church. Church planting is a brave and honorable calling. New churches are desperately needed, but some young pastors feel forced into church planting by the circumstances in the established churches. They find that the difficulties of starting from nothing are preferable, when compared with the fight they face trying to turn around a plateaued or declining church. Consequently, the large investments of emotion, spiritual and physical energy, and money that past generations gave are being lost as those churches die and close.

I completely understand the position of these young pastors. If they start a church they only have to fight one enemy: Satan. If they take a set-in-its-ways older church, they will have to fight not only Satan, but also the church people that are supposed to be fighting Satan alongside the pastor. Many of the best are saying “No thanks” to that proposition, and God seems to agree with them. Unless churches that are declining or stuck on a plateau in regard to attendance make major changes, hundreds, if not thousands, of them will close in the next two decades. Small tweaks to program, style and structure will not bring about lasting improvement. Declining and plateaued churches need to repent of their complacency and selfishness. Then, they need to ask the Holy Spirit for a new burden for souls and a new vision that will enable them to bring this generation to Christ.