;)
Tightropes and Balancing Acts (or … Church Life)
Posted by SelahV in Uncategorized
I recently posed a question on one of my blogs regarding church visitation and why it is the least attended event in church life. A friend of mine, Colin McGahey, answered: “A typical SBC church: Sunday morning and afternoon/evening, Tuesday FAITH, Wed. AWANA and Bible Study, Fri or Sat: event/youth event. Consider the myriad of sports and lessons kids are members of. Throw in the Thurs night small group or Bible study. Throw in a Bible study to reach neighbors. Throw in the time it takes for leaders to prepare lessons, etc, while maintaining a family and working like a dog all week just to put food on the table and allow his wife to stay home with the children. On top of this, ask them to get out into the world and get to know people and witness- by doing something else- namely visitation!!!”
Admittedly, Colin was venting, and honorably so, as he called for “balance” in another comment: “I do believe visitation is essential, that is why other activities in the church need to give way for it. Sometimes we need to make room for those times when we can have non-Christian couples over for dinner, or going out to do things not at the church to have more opportunities to witness”.
As young pastors seek to be all to all for all in churches, I wonder if some of you could help us consider how you balance the multiple activities in a church while trying to maintain a home and family life. Are pastors expected to be at all the events? How do you find a balance? Who should set the terms of balance? Are we doing too much in church and majoring on minors?
What are the majors?
Throughout my husband’s ministries we often found ourselves going days without time for one another to just sit and chat. Meals were snatched as he went out the door–most times, missed altogether. How do you maintain relationships with the church while protecting time with your family?
This is one of the busiest times of the year for everyone—ministers and members, alike. How do you balance your acts of service? Do you feel like you are walking on a tight rope? What are some suggestions you could offer young pastors? selahV
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
1) Plurality of elders—that would be a good start
2) Know where you desire to serve. Once that’s settled—serve Him with passion!
3) Know where you’re not to serve and don’t be afraid to say no.
4) Trust your lay leadership with real responsibility.
5) You control where you are to go, don’t let other’s control you.
6) If you think you’re doing too much…news flash, you’re doing too much.
7) Thank Him for the opportunity to serve where He leads and ask for wisdom where He wants you.
A frazzled, hurried, over-committed, under-prepared elder/pastor is not a help to anyone.
Bro. John, I would assume that we could all agree that “A frazzled, hurried, over-committed, under-prepared elder/pastor is not a help to anyone.”
You give us some sweet tid-bits of wisdom in your list. I especially like number 7: “Thank Him for the opportunity to serve where He leads and ask for wisdom where He wants you.”
So often we ask for the wisdom, we seek His strength and guidance but we do not remember to “thank Him” for “the opportunity”. Perhaps this is one area we most neglect. Being thankful for the opportunity He brings our way. When we are thankful, the difficulties in our service are reduced to pinpricks of inconvenience. Thanks for sharing. selahV
Successful pastors, meaning those whose churches were growing spiritually and usually numerically, spend much, much more time in prayer and Bible study. That’s what all the activity is about anyway. It’s about success. Even if it isn’t about our own pastoral security, it is about success in God’s Kingdom, a great desire not to fail as a pastor, to reach the lost, to help people grow.
Some may consider the driven pastor prideful, self-centered. Usually he is fearful. He is afraid that his church will fail, that his church will fire him, that he will fail personally, that he will fail God. That kind of fear does not flourish in the presence of God. So, before any of us change a thing, we should change ourselves by making sure our “abiding” time is our priority.
I don’t think I need to do less before I do more, and the more I need to do is working on me by abiding in Him. Then my heart will be in shape to make the decisions about what to do each day. I don’t have a clue what to tell pastors to do with their schedules. I do know that most of the time, most of us are spending less time in prayer and the word and on our own real growth as a child of God.
Bro. Cyle, Whether a pastor or a lay-person, I believe we could probably all use more time with our Lord in reading His Word, absorbing His guidance and communing with Him in prayer. I have found that in the most confusing circumstances that abiding in my Lord has kept my heart in peace, my mind clear and my spirit moving in His direction.
It doesn’t take much to shake the faith of a person seeking results rather than simply following in obedience. Perhaps the “fear” of man’s rejection is what fuels many of us in our service with the Lord. That may be why we get so discouraged so easily. When our trust is in Him, we will trust our efforts to Him as well as the results of those efforts.
I would hope all Christians would seek the Lord early in the day. And when we seek Him abandon our cares and expectations at His feet before we get up and go about His business. If only we could see ourselves as yoked to His yoke as we walk throughout the day, we would carry less burdens in our walk.
As usual, I thank you for your words of wisdom. selahV
I am not yet a pastor. I am a student and professional, and although the comment is a great jumping off point for the discussion on pastor’s priorities, I was actually speaking to what many pastors push on their church members. When so much church activity is recommended or promoted, even sometimes passively guitling members into showing up by overestimating its importance, it inevitably takes away from other aspects of those member’s lives. The question is whether the particular church activity is actually more fruitful for the kingdom.
My abiding and Bible study time comes usually briefly in the morning and longer after all are asleep. Perhaps as a pastor one has more time to spend in study during the day, perhaps not. Yet it remains that everything asked of members is asked outside of their demands of work and family. Just like a student can often tell which professors have been pastors, members can often tell which pastors have had experience devoting themselves to the church while working full-time secular jobs. So my frustration more has to do with the fact that we may be replacing important moments in our member’s lives by seemingly important moments. What I mean by that is are we looking to thrust our people out into the culture? Are we comandeering time that might be better spent having them entertain unsaved guests in their homes? Or having them interact at the local grocery store cooking classes? Or meeting parents at their child’s preschool gymnastics practice? You can only spend so much time preparing, then you gotta just do it.
SelahV,
Though I am not presently a Lead Pastor, our Lord graced me by assigning me to many privileged years in that role (admittedly, some church members would caveat that with ‘but He cursed us!:^).
It’s only expected our newest batch of boys from God will possess ministry ideas, perceptions, visions and orthopraxy, but, although Biblical to the core, nonetheless are strangely different from my generation. And, if these ‘preacher-boys’ do not perceive that and appropriately counter that, pain and confusion exclusively awaits their little fannies.
Indeed, I don’t think young pastors are void of the above. Perhaps that’s why more young ministers than ever before had rather start a new Church than ‘pastor’ an old one. This is definitely a good thing if God called them to such a Church Planting Ministry.
For my part, however, I think it’s tragic if planting a new Church is more out of running from the old–helping them make the transition–and rather nesting into a new situation where no transition needs to happen. Many traditional Churches with the ‘Tuesday-Night-Visitation-Syndrome’ will either die out or be led by old Christian codgers like me who perpetuate their condition by acquiescing in it with them. It’s a comfortable place to be for much of my generation after all.
Saying that, a young God-called pastor would do well to explore this upfront with prospective search committees. And, I do not mean naively believing all the PR pomp the search committee tells its desired candidate. It’s not that they intentionally lie mind you. Only that they suffer searchspeak similar to the candidate’s salaryspeak.
Rather, if the candidate can determine positively that, despite the traditionalness the Church embraces, she nonetheless loves her pastors, the trophy is won. And, if the candidate will love the Church back, and with all his getting, get patience to see her through, hope survives that the Church will transition. It may be slow transition but transition nonetheless.
My hope is pie-in-sky I realize to some. That’s fair. I will not argue to the contrary.
Yet, I see less hope—not to mention profound disappointment—for my part, in a future generation of God-called Pastors, who bypass thousands of Churches needing young leadership; and who, though with fully armed knowledge of their impending death, would rather start from scratch a ‘new’ church with no traditions to overcome, no rules to prohibit, no Tuesday night visitation to get in the way of ‘real’ evangelism and, of course, no strange, funny hymns to disappoint our Fenders.
Who will lead our 43,000 SBC Churches tomorrow? Not me or my generation. We’re all dying. Must our Churches die with us?
Grace. With that, I am…
Peter
Colin,
You’ve raised a great issue. Sometimes churches and their leaders do become focused on attendance rather than on disciple-making (which includes engaging people who are not yet disciples). I worked 60plus hours a week for twelve years before I entered the pastorate fulltime and began to work 60plus hours a week. Here’s my solution from the pastoral side:
What we do needs to matter. No unnecessary meetings, classes, or other scheduled stuff. No requirements to attend just to attend.
What we require and expect needs to matter and have a Biblical precedent.
For instance, to be in leadership in our church in the past you had to attend all regularly scheduled meetings. Now, you have to attend worship, Bible study, and LIFE group. Worshiping God corporately is commanded, studying the Bible is essential, building discipling relationships is too. We are about to start a new outreach / inreach ministry. We will give up one night of Life groups each month to do so, and the Life groups will alternate the ministry.
Now, what we expect of parishioners:
God is the priority. Don’t complain to me that you have no time to do what is necessary to be His disciple if you’re spending 20 hours watching TV every week, every Saturday on the deer stand, and enrolling your kid in every extra-curricular activity known to man to keep them happy and to feed some twisted idea that all those activities are necessary to their own Christian growth.
Leaders need to do their part and be aware of the realities of life in our culture. They also need to do their part and speak the truth about our activity obsessed society.
Peter,
I have yet to encounter anyone of my generation who thinks visitation is not important and essential. I think you are right about the church planting phenomenon- it is often a retreat. Yet I wouldn’t be so quick to lay all the blame at the feet of those unwilling to subject themselves to the pain of turning the ship with such a small rudder. For one, the younger generation is a product of the older. And two, I know former congregationalists moving to elder rule and their own church-plants because they see the Bible saying the pastor should lead, yet perverted priesthood of the believer notions say “we don’t have to.” It is a two-way street. But you want to see traditional, then come to my church.
Cyle,
I would love to have the time to do any extracurricular activity, much less one every weekend! Indeed God is the priority, so are we teaching people the difference between God and activity in the church? Part of that, being my point earlier, is that leaving home certain days/nights of the week and mixing with people is part of precipitating evangelism encounters. Not only must there be time for that, but it must be emphasized. Our culture is one of activity obsession- it is what it is. So I don’t necessarily see activity-obsession as the problem- it is whether our time is redeeemable before the eyes of the Lord.
Selah, thanks for a great post. I see WAY too much tendency for my young pastor and his wife to get “burned out” already, even after only two years. I’m so grateful, though, that he is working with an “established” church, rather than starting “his” own.
But on a slightly different note, I guess I’m going to go out on a limb here, and I’ll probably be branded a heathen. Sorry
I’m not a heathen, I promise.
I despise visitation and visitation programs. I think they are somewhat insulting to the visitors, and I think they stop a lot of people from filling out visitor cards. Every time they visit a new church, they gotta either make doggone sure to clean up the house by Tuesday, or they gotta find an excuse to not be home that night, because some bunch of strangers that they have never met before and have nothing in common with is gonna come stomping up to their door and expect to be cordially invited to tie up the next hour of their time. They know that they can’t afford to be rude, and if they simply step out on the porch to talk, they’re going to have to freeze to death in their socks and wife-beater shirts. In other words, the church is imposing itself into someone’s life when it has not been invited, based on the Great Commission. We, as church members, feel that if we go on visitation, we are doing our part to fulfill “Go into all the world”, but if we stay home, we’re failing that.
I know this post isn’t about this, so I’m sorry for being off track (if I am), but several have mentioned the importance of visitation. Have I done it? Yep. Full blown FAITH graduate here. Have I had it done to me? Yep, multiple times by very well meaning church members that I would love to share a cup of coffee with. But I still think it’s VERY ineffective and possibly even counterproductive.
I personally think that if folks were as friendly to visitors on Sunday morning as they are on Tuesday night, and if we invited people to coffee, if we had refreshments available at our churches at every service for visitors, and if we made some wise phone calls, we could possibly be MORE effective than visitation. A lot of visitation programs are just litmus tests – the “really spiritual guys and gals” show up and everyone else is regarded as carnal.
The principle of door to door “Hey, we’re from Crossroads and we love to see you at church” has a whole DIFFERENT value and I think is probably more effective. The principle of “Hey, we just want to welcome you to the neighborhood and ask if there is anything our church can do to help you” is also good and valuable.
The idea of hounding every visitor to make sure they come back, to me, is ridiculous and way overrated.
Maybe I’m wrong, but those are my thoughts. I think some other “traditions” like these are the reasons that pastors and laity alike get burned out on the “responsibilities” of church.
Just doing the same old programs better, in my opinion, isn’t effective.
I guess this sounds like a real rant, but I don’t mean for it to be, seriously.
God bless!
On defintions, I define visitation as
visiting visitors to the church, visiting widows, visiting homebound, visiting hospitals, and visiting members
Of course, I did not grow up in the church and still have trouble learning Baptist liturgy. Is this the traditional meaning of visitation?
4 of those five, while technically visitation, do not match what I typically see referred to by churches as “the visitation program”. Just my experience, probably not universal. Sorry to misunderstand and misapply what you were referring to.
Colin,
I did not know my words implied all youngers dissented from visitation’s benefit, but if I did, you were right to correct it.
While it stands true that youngers are products of olders, it would be interesting to know just how that counts as reason for the youngers being so darn different from olders. It seems to me that if that is pressed, youngers should be like the olders not different from them.
From my perspective, if a person feels called of God to pastor sheep, he cannot focus so much on obstinate sheep with perhaps ‘perverted views’ of where to graze, how to find water, when to bah, what sheep are acceptable to the flock. What should we expect if they are sheep? Shepherds are there to lead them.
Shepherds are also called to patience, endurance, loneliness and sometimes the priviledge of being stomped by the ‘little’ sheep until they are dead–’so persecuted the prophets before us.’ A spiritually expensive journey. It is also an honorable, utterly fulfilling journey.
If I had it to do over, I think I’d camp at least two months a year in Jeremiah. He would have cured me early on of my high-flying allusion I was called to change the Church rather than listen to God.
The two are light years apart. I unfortunately wasted many years thinking they were the same.
As for laying all blame on the poor Pastor’s plate, I must plead innocent. However, charge me guilty, and that doubly so, if I fail to serve the full weight of responsibility to God’s shepherds. God placed some in the Church…’pastor-teachers’…who bear full responsibility for the sheep they shepherd. Indeed sheep have excuse for not knowing where to graze, and that till Jesus Comes. Not so the Shepherd.
Finally, I openly admit I possess a tradition flair about me. I also openly declare I consciously do not expect reciprocal tradition in return. I presently belong to a Church that, at times, is much too daring…if you will, risque, in my view. Since I am called there not to change the church to my image but to listen for God in theirs, my restful contentment in Christ is assured.
Is it too much to query why it is that youngers may not approach the traditional Churches in similar tones? Rather than see tradition as obstacle, see tradition as where they are…Rather than see reformation as static, see it as dynamic.
Know, Colin, I very much respect your point of view. I am only, as others, thinking out loud. I possess within no sense of finality about my answers, even if one called them that. Just a fellow struggler, wiggling along our Lord’s path He’s graciously given me.
Grace. With that, I am…
Peter
Bernard,
I think perhaps your definition is the one being discussed here moreso than mine.
Peter,
I was giving you encouragement about the next generation! There is, I agree, a propensity to avoid tradition among the “youngers” in the evangelical world. Why? I don’t know for sure, but I do know their upbringing surely had influence in that regard. Perhaps its being an eyewitness to how the culture will progress as our generation ages. Perhaps its a response to the seeker sensitive movement, or the lack of regenerate membership…who knows? (Perhaps it was being shuttled off to Children’s Church and other separate worship services all their lives).
But I think you are right in that a lot hinges on the “approach.” If pastors expect membership to approach worship without undue regard to new versus old, so too must the pastor when approaching the church. And I see it working both ways here, too. Pastors that have non-traditional ideas (or return-to-traditional looking to our Baptist forefathers) will get passed over by a great many churches, especially if they are soteriologically reformed. Combine that with the pastors not even willing to approach the traditional churches, and you have the recipe for a grand-scale church planting movement among Baptists, and possibly, unfortunately, a house church movement.
More importantly, however, is looking to what traditions may not be helping the church. The churches in America are declining, and Christians are outnumbered at a far greater rate today than in the heyday of the former generation. Bernard is arguing that people today aren’t as hospitable as before. So is there another way to reach them? I have got my ideas, but they may not be traditional. So will I have the patience to suppress my reforms despite the feeling of urgency to reach the dying? I hope so, because the church I joined recently is KJV, traditional hymns only, no small groups, etc. And though I have never been a member in a traditional church before this one, I dearly love these people. And so here I am, Peter, with a lack of finality in my words as you.
Colin, I hope by my introducing my post with your comment that folks don’t get the idea that you are in any way “against” visitation or the other programs in church. If it has, that is not what I purposed. I saw in your comment, words that mirror many I have heard in every church I’ve ever been a part of. Thus I think we have a real issue here that we can put undue pressure on members and do the “guilt-trip” thing to produce results we want.
Aligning ourselves with Christ and His purpose will often find us with far more peaceful lives and in many cases needing to heed the “Martha-Martha” sermon.
There needs to be a balance. A balance for all. I think the weekly schedules churches put out and expect of their membership are often way beyond dealing with an activity-obsessed society. Many activities are there as choice options. And we may as well have our options on the block as well as secular folks. It is when our church leadership demands of its own an allegiance to all meetings as a prerequisite to Christian faithfulness that folks can get burned out.
I think your point regarding time to invite the lost to your home for fellowship is one worth noting. I remember when I first became a Christian, that we had many activities at our church where we were able to invite the lost to be part and it worked. I also saw many where it didn’t work, but when I had some over for fellowship with other Christians, it helped them realize we were all just people. So there is a lot to be said for leaving room in our lives for engaging the world.
You asked about the definition of “visitation”. I am one who believes visitation is not for simply going to prospects and sharing FAITH. There are those who are called to do that. That is one kind of visitation. Then there is visiting the sick—which can be done through the deacons’ ministries and Sunday School ministries. In my opinion, one of the most neglected groups of people to visit and to invite into small fellowships in homes, is the newly converted. They need a brother/mentor to help encourage and guide.
Visitation is what the church purposes it to be. We have been a part of several different organized visitations. GROW was one of those.
I appreciate your interaction on this subject here. You know I always look forward to hearing your thoughts. selahV
Peter: thanks for coming over and dialoging here. I needed a dinosaur.
Just kidding. It’s hard to believe so much has changed yet not changed at all.
I do not think the new pastors are doing anything differently than we once did in our first steps of pastoring. They may be trying to change some things but change things with a different method. We sought to change methods by introducing new ideas. Sometimes those changes brought about die-hard traditional changes within the church. Sometimes we got our walking papers for daring to even suggest such stuff.
I suppose what I was hoping for here in our dialog was to recognize how pastors old and new, put undue pressure on their members, themselves and even other pastors to “perform”. And how can we avoid those pitfalls. As you stated, you made some mistakes–as did we. Looking back there are things we could have done and things I would not have done. Yet God took our enthusiam to reach the lost and to build up the believers and used it for His purpose.
Today, if our younger pastors could see the wisdom we’ve gained by the error of our ways and could see we are not condemning them in their ways, perhaps we could all move to a greater place of learning, growing and encouraging one another.
I do find myself betwixt and between with church today. And in a way, I think I now know how some of the older generation felt when we arrived on their doorsteps 30 years ago. Churches have changed in 30 years. All across the nation. And they will continue to change as new ideas are implemented. selahV
Colin,
Thanks for the good chat. You cited Benard’s view that ‘people today aren’t as hospitable as before.’ I, for one, would welcome some empirical data to either substantiate such a claim or question it.
Interestingly, Bernard himself prefaced his claim with ‘I despise visitation and visitation programs. I think they are somewhat insulting…” Is this ‘despite’ a personal aversion toward an approach? If not, I’m puzzled why one would ‘despise’ a view just because evidence overturns it.
Know I certainly think the traditional ‘door-to-door’ method may produce precisely the effects that Benard claims in certain areas. My wife and I, for over five years lived in downtown Atlanta–and by downtown, I mean that literally, We dwelt in a warehouse on the railroad track–behind a homeless shelter and the Fulton County Jail.
I was the star witness for Prosecutors in sending a Drug Lord to prison. I lost a good neighbor. He lived next door. Would door-to-door work there? Only fully armed fools know that answer.
I also assisted a Church in Buckhead, perhaps the richest area of Atlanta. Did door-to-door work there? A totally wasted effort, at least by the visible returns gauge.
On the other hand, there are countless situations–even my Church, the one I mentioned being ‘risque’–does door-to-door evangelism effectively. One couid ask FBC, Daytona Beach if door-to-door is still effective.
All that to say, traditional means, like non-traditional means, must be viewed, at least in my view, more from specific, local contextual matters, rather than deduced from overarching dictum.
With that, I am…
Peter
Colin,
Thanks for the good chat. You cited Benard’s view that ‘people today aren’t as hospitable as before.’ I, for one, would welcome some empirical data to either substantiate such a claim or question it.
Interestingly, Bernard himself prefaced his claim with ‘I despise visitation and visitation programs. I think they are somewhat insulting…” Is this ‘despite’ a personal aversion toward an approach? If not, I’m puzzled why one would ‘despise’ a view just because evidence overturns it.
Know I certainly think the traditional ‘door-to-door’ method may produce precisely the effects that Benard claims in certain areas. My wife and I, for over five years lived in downtown Atlanta–and by downtown, I mean that literally, We dwelt in a warehouse on the railroad track–behind a homeless shelter and the Fulton County Jail.
I was the star witness for Prosecutors in sending a Drug Lord to prison. I lost a good neighbor. He lived next door. Would door-to-door work there? Only fully armed fools know that answer.
I also assisted a Church in Buckhead, perhaps the richest area of Atlanta. Did door-to-door work there? A totally wasted effort, at least by the visible returns gauge.
On the other hand, there are countless situations–even my Church, the one I mentioned being ‘risque’–does door-to-door evangelism effectively. One could ask FBC, Daytona Beach if door-to-door is still effective.
All that to say, traditional means, like non-traditional means, must be viewed, at least in my view, more from specific, local contextual matters, rather than deduced from overarching dictum.
With that, I am…
Peter
Bernard: you bring up another great point worth discussing. Don’t feel you cannot chase rabbits with my posts. I love them as long as we all know which hole we are all going down when we are chasing each other’s dialog.
How do folks feel about a group of strangers converging on their domain uninvited? Could we do this in a better way? I think so. One way would be to call ahead and ask permission to visit and see if it is convenient. Anyone else have any ideas on this? should we make it another post? selahV
SelahV,
No worries, I am learning here.
Peter,
I do visitation unannounced with my pastor. Some are receptive, some give any excuse they can as to why now is not a good time. I took from Bernard that he despised visitation because people he visited seemed awfully uncomfortable entertaining visitors. I won’t defend that point, though it is probably safe to say we have all experienced both kinds.
You rightly said in closing, “All that to say, traditional means, like non-traditional means, must be viewed, at least in my view, more from specific, local contextual matters, rather than deduced from overarching dictum.“
Peter – No empirical data, just that I know I despise the intrusion when on the receiving end (even though I like the people) and I almost always felt unwelcome when on the “visiting” end. There’s also the fact that most people assume we are Mormon’s or Jehovah’s Witnesses and immediately get confrontational, which does little to advance the cause of the church, because it puts us in a defense mode that most “visitators” are ill prepared for.
SelahV – I feel bad when people come to my house to visit because I KNOW some things. One, they’re there because my name was on a list. Two, the particular crew that comes to my house was probably chosen because they are similar to me in some demographic way. Perhaps I attended “their” Sunday School class. In other words, I am just the victim of a program. Their motives are pure, honest, and good, but they were probably manipulated into “doing it this way” because their pastor led 50 people to the Lord 20 years ago on visitation. I live FAR back in the woods; people who visit me really oughtta announce themselves, especially on dark nights, etc., but the prevailing wisdom is that calling ahead is BAD, because that gives the “mark” a chance to either “run” or say “no”. Visitation programs remind me of a bunch of cops – or a SWAT team – trying to figure out how to infiltrate a perp’s domicile. I don’t like being thought of in that fashion, even if the motive is pure. It’s embarrassing to talk with most of these people, because if they DON’T know you, they are demanding your salvation testimony within 5 minutes, and if they DO know you, they’re trying their best to “do it right” so that they can make a good report to the pastor when they get back to the church. It’s VERY uncomfortable for the “mark”, because – at least for me – it makes them feel like nothing but a number on a list.
Perhaps, though, I simply know too much about it. I sincerely believe that the visitation crews mean well. I just don’t like the system and I think there is a better way to get to know people and make our churches appealing to them. Visitation is just the “assumed” cure-all by a lot of traditionalist churches. I think visitation has to be done in a VERY genuine manner, and with today’s legalities and the required protections of male-female combinations, it’s VERY hard to put three people in a home while maintaining that genuine spirit.
Just running “visitation” as a Tuesday night program where we “blitz the county” EVERY WEEK is, in my opinion, not effective.
I’m all for special events of canvassing and witnessing. I just think it has to be done right, and I think it’s very inappropriate to judge someone’s spirituality based on whether or not they attend the “visitation” program.
I just want to address the busyness thing again. And, Colin, I’m really not trying to be attacking to you at all. There are alot of us who really are under the gun by no choice of our own, but there are many, many of us who have chosen this situation upon ourselves.
The average American Christian spends 20 hours a week watching TV, but only 3 hours a week going to church. If someone does everything we do at our church, including visitation, they will spend 8 hours a week doing it. If they’re involved in a weekend ministry like Upwards or Angel Food, they’ll spend 12 hours a week doing that. 20 vs. 12.
If I watched 20 hours of TV a week I would need visitation, too…
I think that simply comparing the number of hours of TV to the number of hours AT CHURCH is a little deceptive, seriously. EVERY church event requires AT LEAST 1 hour to get ready, travel to, and travel from. I’m at church MUCH more than 3 hours a week. 5.5 to 6 hours on Sunday alone, with two trips each way involved. Except for sermon times, I am onstage virtually all the time. I’m not just holding down a pew. Add in my music practice time and the time studying Sunday School lessons in case somebody doesn’t show up to teach their class. Add in time preparing PowerPoint. add in that for several months I was teaching a Sunday night discipleship class, which required at LEAST an hour of prep – if not 2 – every week. Add in Wednesday night services that we really have to compress our schedule to make it to. Add in 2-3 hour board meetings once a month. Add in trips on Saturday to work on sound issues. Add in any special events we may have going on.
Add in the fact that I’m a volunteer. Add in the fact that some would make me feel guilty because I’m not involved in a certain program which, supposedly, would only tie up one or two more hours. Add in the fact that it’s easy to call me lazy because I don’t show up to every Saturday Building and Grounds committee workday because I DO want to do some things with my family.
TV? 2 hours a week, max. Sunday afternoons. I don’t even technically own a television. I hope I’m not average
But all the congregation might see is that the piano player played a couple of choir songs and did an offertory.
I’m not trying to pump my own horn, but we tend to look at the visible parts of peoples lives and assume they have plenty of time to do what we want them to do. It’s not always true. We need to WORK WITH people, not just stand around criticizing them for not showing up at all our church events.
Cyle,
I understand your point, but not quite agreeing with your comparison. I watch TV- I watch it usually sometime between 11pm-2am while working, unless I am reading. Plus, if you include getting ready, driving, etc. for/to church, that likely comes out to much more- we’re doing for church Sun am from 8:30-1:30, then evening from 5-730 (or 8). That is almost 8 hours just on Sunday. The same could be said of FAITH, visitation, AWANAS, etc. Count the drive time, getting ready time, and that doesn’t even include the lesson prep time. With time, it is about opportunity cost and time slots, not quantity.
So for a guy like me who rarely ever watches TV during Prime Time, you take 5-9 hours during the week, at night, during family time and/or time to reach neighbors and friends or have home Bible study. Is that too much? Not necessarily, but that includes no overtime/late work nights, no kids activities, no dates with my wife, no one-on-one disicpleship, etc.
It seems the solution is not reducing programs necessarily, but advocating a pick one and don’t neglect your family or your evangelism type attitude.
Colin,
You’re spending some significant time at the church house. I preach two services on Sunday morning and lead a small group on Sunday night and spend less than 8 hours doing that on Sunday. I think a pick-less strategy is important, unless you’re primarily an equipper training others to do the one-on-one and evangelistic type of outreach. Again, that’s why we don’t mandate or even push Wednesdays. I do 4 – 8 week courses of study, publicize them, and don’t expect people to attend them all. We try to keep our activities to Sunday & Wednesday. And, we keep our “expected” activities almost exclusively on Sunday. By the way, 70% of our church is under the age of 45.
Bernard,
I feel positively identical about intrusion to my little piece of global turf. Yet, erroneous it remains to argue from such simplistic, anecdotal experience–at least in my view.
I hope to Heavens all people don’t possess some of the eccentricities with which I happen to be adorned. Pity them…
My point again, albeit you feel you’re justified in ‘despising’ d2d evangelism, it is premature to conclude that none of the Lord’s vineyard keepers need pick grapes there, nor, if they do, expect a harvest.
Grace. With that, I am…
Peter
Sorry folks,
Dr. Patterson has always been right on this one and still is.
Most pastors are lazy and sleep way too much.
cb
Not me, CB. I get up at 05:30 to take care of my dog … and clean my guns.
Unless I’m going to slay the great whitetail … then it’s more like 04:30.
I also think most people who say visitation does not work are people who are consistently inconsistent in its practice. But, that is just me.
I also think Peter Lumpkin is showing great wisdom in his thoughts about the matter. But again, that is just me.
Visitation does work. Methods must constantly be refined and developed, but it does work.
I will see you guys later after have done that which I am speaking of now.
cb
It is at this point I must say Geoff Baggett is a man of character and true grit.
As my mentor Charlie used to say; “Keep your firearms clean and your edged weapons sharp.”
Also a well fed Bulldog will always defend the master who consistently feeds him.
Geoff, may your tribe increase and your weapons shoot straight.
cb
Now, I really have to go see some folks.
cb
CB, my husband had to do one of those time-management logs when he was in school. He hated the thing. But it proved he didn’t lie around sleeping or twiddling his thumbs.
I wonder how much time pastors actually spend sleeping and imbibing in their “lazy” activities. The ones I’ve known are pretty busy guys. I’d hate to say “most” are lazy and sleep too much. I might say most spend an abundance of time blogging, watching football and eating. Don’t know about sleeping though. selahV
SelahV,
Most are lazy and sleep way too much. If your husband is different you should thank God.
cb
SelahV,
Most pastors do not blog. They are too lazy to blog.
cb
cb,
Don’t you just hate generalizations?
May I just say to all the pastors out there – I have not come to the same conclusion as cb (but then maybe I know a different set of pastors). Most of the pastors I know (most of which are church planters) are not lazy and do not get enough sleep. Most of the guys I know do blog, don’t take enough dates with their wives and work very hard, but don’t share their faith as often as they think they should.
By the way, I gave up TV six months ago. I have not missed it one bit. I am glad to have more time to read, put kids to bed, study or email. And yes, blog.
Roger,
I think it may depend on the number of pastors one knows in order to determine what most means.
BTW, what is TV?
cb
Isn’t that the thing that I watch all of my hunting and fishing shows on?
I’m just getting around to the discussion, but I’d like to throw a new twist to it.
I personally think that in many churches, we do an overkill on preaching. Sometimes several sermons on Sunday AM, then Sunday PM, and Wednesday PM. Then many listen to sermons all week long on Christian radio. Many Sunday School lessons are also basically sermons.
But who really remembers and puts into practice what they hear in all these sermons?
Would it not perhaps be better if we heard one sermon a week, and spent the rest of the time trying to assimilate, and put into practice what we’ve heard?
Some “cell churches” have basically one sermon a week, and then a discussion on how to personally apply the teaching from the sermons in the cell groups.
It seems to me that if the average pastor were not expected to produce so many sermons, we could make some significant progress on this whole issue of busyness.
David,
I was able to preach at a church in Ohio, and the wonderful pastor there told me the same thing. Instead of 86ing the pm service, however, he drove home the same biblical point from the am service using an alternate text or emphasis. In essence, he prepared one message per Sunday with a mission to follow-up the remainder of the week on the same point.
Colin,
I’m not sure what you mean by 86ing, but I think your friend in Ohio did perhaps have a good idea. I wonder if it helped him and his congregation to not be quite so busy, though.
David,
Sorry about that- in restaurant kitchens, when you run out of an item, it is “86ed”: it has been ejected from the night’s menu.
As for busyness, it certainly decreased the pastor’s preparation time.
We don’t do Sunday night church. Never have, never will. Instead, we meet in homes for small groups. Simple church. Everyone should give it a try. But those us us with Baptist blood coursing through our veins are often overwhelmed with guilt if we are not entering the church portals every Sunday morning, Sunday night, and Wednesday night.
David Rogers,
Some days I like you better than on other days. Today is a day I like you very much.
You are very correct about sermons. It is my opinion that the multitude of poor sermons due to laziness is often excused by saying we have to do so many each week.
If we only preached one sermon a week that everyone who heard it knew came from God for them due to the pastor working prayerfully before the Lord for its content and application maybe we would see stronger disciples and be able to do more to encounter our communities with the gospel as we live out the life of a Christ Follower among the lost and the unchurched.
Also, Momma and the kids might see more of us and see more of Jesus in us than seeing a stressed out Papa trying to “stage” time with his family.
David, You do come up with some good stuff sometime. Keep it up and maybe we will have you come to Alabama to speak one day. I know you would enjoy the “upgrade” from your visit to the TAR HEEL nation. We will also feed you decent B-B-Q.
cb
everyone…thanks for your participation in this discussion. from visitation, to activities, to sermons, to entire nights of services–we’ve had suggestions to eliminate in order to develop better time management. Perhaps I shall post next on the structure of a perfect church and we could get it all figured out by the New Year.
selahV
SelahV,
Do you want my outline and pictures of a perfect church? Or you could just come and visit for yourself.
cb