The future of the traditional evangelical church as I see it is:
a.) mega churches continuing to grow, consolidating what is left of the Christendom populations, providing a traditional church services to the shrinking masses of already existing Christians and lapsed Christians coming back into the fold,
b.) smaller churches of under 200 slowly dying and eventually closing, and
c.) the birthing of new missional communities through either seeding new missionary communities or transitioning (the aforementioned) dying small churches into vibrant places of mission.
The fact is according to statistics approx. 20% of all existing evangelical churches are heading into category a.) 80% into category b.) and there is alot of church planting going on (that I can’t quantify) that looks like c.). I am not optimistic that alot of transitioning is going on from churches in b.) category to becoming more like c.). Does this experience jive with your observations? the statistics in your denomination?
If the above is true, the kinds of pastors we will need the most will be those who can lead category c.). We of course will still need the polished smooth speaker-CEO’s that can lead the largest of mega churches. These churches will continue to survive in providing the kind of church that fits in with the increasingly busy market driven lives of the traditional suburban evangelical. Whatever you might think of these forms of church life, the reality is that these large mega centers are good at making Christianity work for already existing Christians. They lack the flexibility however (and the cultural dynamic)to engage the many less affluent unreached contexts of the West. If the church is to engage the growing contexts of post Christendom West for mission, we will need more of churches in category c.) and pastors to lead these missionary enterprises.
These pastors will be:
1.)BE RESOURCEFUL – OFTEN ABLE TO EARN THEIR OWN LIVING
2.) COMMUNAL SHEPHERDS – CULTIVATORS OF COMMUNITY IDENTITY IN MISSION
3.) INTERPRETIVE LEADERS – FUNDERS OF IMAGINATION THRU SCRIPTURE FOR WHAT GOD IS DOING AMONG US AND AROUND US
4.) DIRECTORS OF SPIRITUAL FORMATION – SHAPERS OF PLACES THAT SHAPE OUR LIVES INTO CHRIST AND HIS MISSION
5.) LEADERS WHO GIVE AWAY POWER – DISPERSERS OF AUTHORITY AND LEADERSHIP INTO THE NIEGHBORHOODS
This all leads me to suggest that the church that is left in N America should throw the bulk of its resources in training pastors for the work of churches in category c.), or the work of transitioning churches in b.) to c.). Just as the Irish monastaries saved civilization from the takeover of the barbarians in the 4th century Western Europe, so it will be the spread of these kind of self sustaining missional communities over the continent to breed a new witness of the Spirit and the harvesting of a whole new generation of Christians, participants in God’s Kingdom life. If you ask me, the N American church should spend a significant part of its resourses and efforts in training missionary pastors to lead these kind of missional communities to inhabit all the places deserted by the wealth of mega churches for here is where the life of the Spirit “in Christ” shall breath again, where God shall bring forth new life to transform our society until he comes. I said this all back here in this piece. This is my take on where seminaries should go, and where church resources should go before it is too late. What say you?
Missio Alliance Comment Policy
The Missio Alliance Writing Collectives exist as a ministry of writing to resource theological practitioners for mission. From our Leading Voices to our regular Writing Team and those invited to publish with us as Community Voices, we are creating a space for thoughtful engagement of critical issues and questions facing the North American Church in God’s mission. This sort of thoughtful engagement is something that we seek to engender not only in our publishing, but in conversations that unfold as a result in the comment section of our articles.
Unfortunately, because of the relational distance introduced by online communication, “thoughtful engagement” and “comment sections” seldom go hand in hand. At the same time, censorship of comments by those who disagree with points made by authors, whose anger or limited perspective taints their words, or who simply feel the need to express their own opinion on a topic without any meaningful engagement with the article or comment in question can mask an important window into the true state of Christian discourse. As such, Missio Alliance sets forth the following suggestions for those who wish to engage in conversation around our writing:
1. Seek to understand the author’s intent.
If you disagree with something the an author said, consider framing your response as, “I hear you as saying _________. Am I understanding you correctly? If so, here’s why I disagree. _____________.
2. Seek to make your own voice heard.
We deeply desire and value the voice and perspective of our readers. However you may react to an article we publish or a fellow commenter, we encourage you to set forth that reaction is the most constructive way possible. Use your voice and perspective to move conversation forward rather than shut it down.
3. Share your story.
One of our favorite tenants is that “an enemy is someone whose story we haven’t heard.” Very often disagreements and rants are the result of people talking past rather than to one another. Everyone’s perspective is intimately bound up with their own stories – their contexts and experiences. We encourage you to couch your comments in whatever aspect of your own story might help others understand where you are coming from.
In view of those suggestions for shaping conversation on our site and in an effort to curate a hospitable space of open conversation, Missio Alliance may delete comments and/or ban users who show no regard for constructive engagement, especially those whose comments are easily construed as trolling, threatening, or abusive.