Tag Archives: Denominations

The Resurrection of National Denominations Part One: Assessment

Posted on April 5, 2010 by in Organization

George Bullard has continued his assessment of denominations. This is the second of at least three parts.

——————————–

Taken from http://www.thecolumbiapartnership.org/

=================================

April 5, 2010 Edition Copyright 2010,

Rev. George 1 Bullard, D.Min.

The Resurrection of National Denominations

Part One: Assessment

A Travel Free Learning Article

April 5, 2010 Edition

By

George Bullard

Ministry Partner with The Columbia Partnership

Voice: 803.622.0923, E-mail: GBullard@TheColumbiaPartnership.org

Web Site: www.TheColumbiaPartnership.org

In a previous article I talked about the coming death of national denominations. From the Christian

perspective, following death there is a resurrection. Might there be a resurrection of national

denominations at some point? Possibly. Do national denominations have to die for there to be a

resurrection? Probably. Do all national denominations need a resurrection? Not necessarily.

Not all national denominations have lost their way. They are thriving. A few national denominations who

had once their way are now thriving. They transformed. National denominations who have currently lost

their way need to transform in one of five ways depending on an assessment of their starting point.

National denominations who have lost their way may need Revision, Revitalization, Renewal,

Reinvention, or Resurrection. To understand which transformation pathway your national denomination

may need, begin with a clear assessment of your current situation.

Ten Assessment Factors

Ten factors, as a beginning point for dialogue, may provide an assessment for your national

denomination. Many more factors could be suggested. The metrics in these ten are subjective based on

my 50 years of experiencing denominations as an observer, 30 years as a denominational staff person,

and consulting and coaching with more than 300 denominational organizations in 50 different

denominations. Each factor looks at ten year trends in the life and ministry of a national denomination.

The first, and most crucial factor, is that of vision. All five of these pathways assume a national denomination is not currently captivated by an empowering vision of their spiritual strategic direction that is producing vitality and vibrancy throughout the denomination.

Second, is a commitment and successful track record of starting new congregations.

Third, are the financial trends of contributions from congregations, individuals, and various other funding streams.

Fourth, is the membership or number of adherents to denominational churches.

Fifth is the change in number of affiliated churches over the past ten years.

Sixth, is the new clergy under 40 years of age ordained into ministry in the denomination.

Seventh, is the percentage of growing churches.

Eight, is the percentage of churches under 25 years of age.

Ninth, is the nature and experience of national denominational gatherings whether they occur annually or every two to four years.

Ten, is the intensity of conflict in the national denomination.

Five Pathways of Transformation

Where a national denomination is assessed on these ten factors can vary significantly according to the

culture of the denomination, the perspective of the people doing the assessment, and the timing of the

assessment. Also, no national denomination is likely to fit neatly into a single pathway of transformation,

but there is probably one that is most like each national denomination. I invite you to think through these

factors related to your denomination.

Revision: A denomination ripe for a Revision transformation pathway has likely lost vision, focus, and

direction during the past five or so years. It has many good traits and may even be in a crescendo of the

quality of the programs, ministries, and missional activities experienced any time in the past 25 years. It is

starting each year new congregations at a rate of up to two percent of the number of currently affiliated

congregations. Its financial receipts at the national level are at least keeping up with inflation.

It has plateaued nationally in the number of members or adherents in its affiliated churches, in the total

number of affiliated congregations, and in the number of new, ordained clergy under 40 years old. At least

a fourth of its affiliated congregations are growing, and at least a fourth are 25 or fewer years old. [Note:

Some congregations fit both categories.] Its national gatherings are good although the delegates may be

in denial about the impending decline of the national denomination, and there is only a low and typical

intensity of conflict surrounding various issues.

Revitalization: A denomination needing a Revitalization transformation pathway has lacked vision for at

least five to ten years. It is starting a number of new congregations each year at the rate of 1.5 percent or

less of the number of existing congregations, and is thus plateaued or declining in the number of affiliated

congregations. Its annual financial receipts are flat and not keeping up with the rate of inflation. Over the

past decade it has experienced up to a three percent decrease in number of members or adherents in its

affiliated churches and in the number of new, ordained clergy under 40 years old.

Less than 25 percent of its affiliated congregations are growing. The rest are plateaued or declining in

attendance and other vital signs of participation. Less than 25 percent of its affiliated congregations are

25 or fewer years old. Its national gatherings have a tone of nostalgia about the past, plus some

disappointment about the present, and anger at leaders. Conflict is beginning to be expressed at a midintensity.

Renewal: A denomination needing a Renewal transformation pathway has lacked vision for more than a

decade, and has tried several fixes to restore past glory. None have worked for more than one to three

years, and each round has caused them to become weaker. It is starting a number of new congregations

each year at the rate of one percent or less of the number of existing congregations, which means the

number of affiliated congregations is in steady decline. Its annual financial receipts are down up to 10

percent in regard to the rate of inflation over the last decade.

It has experienced a net loss of up to seven percent in total adherents in its congregations, number of

affiliated congregations, and number of new ordained clergy under the age of 40. Less than 20 percent of

its affiliated congregations are growing in attendance and other vital signs of participation. As well, less

than 20 percent of its affiliated congregations are 25 or fewer years old. National gatherings focus on the

constant need to restructure something major in the denomination to see it if will work better. Legislative

processes and resolutions focus on getting the national church to take a stand of issues that are likely to

divide the national denomination. Conflict is a repeating pattern for the denomination.

Reinvention: A denomination needing a Reinvention transformation pathway has lacked vision for 20 to

25 years, perhaps more. It has attempted restructuring multiple times, but often this is more an

accommodation to decline than a repositioning for more effective ministry. It is starting a number of new

congregations each year at the rate of one-half of percent or less of the number of existing congregations,

which means the number of affiliated congregations is in significant decline. Its annual financial receipts

are down up to 20 percent in regard to the rate of inflation over the last decade.

It has experienced a net loss of up to 15 percent in total adherents in its congregations, number of

affiliated congregations, and number of new ordained clergy under the age of 40. Less than 15 percent of

its affiliated congregations are growing in attendance and other vital signs of participation. As well, less

than 15 percent of its affiliated congregations are 25 or fewer years old. National gatherings focus on the

constant need to be faithful to the denomination because while continually getting smaller and weaker,

the current understanding of the denominational ethos is important within the denominational family.

Dealing with issues surrounding regular downsizing, and dialogue about merging with one or more other

denominations are a regular part of the legislative process. Depression actions characterize the

expression of conflict.

Resurrection: A denomination needing a Resurrection transformation pathway has few strong, positive

cultural stories about the last time they were captivated by vision. It has run on the “being faithful”

pathway for so long it believes that is the vision. It is starting few new congregations; maybe none

intentionally. Perhaps the majority of these are started by accident through church splits, or by claiming

churches that affiliate with the denomination as new congregations—even if they were actually started

decades ago. Its annual financial receipts are down more than 20 percent in regard to the rate of inflation

over the last decade.

During the past decade or so it has experienced a net loss of more than 15 percent in total adherents in

its congregations, number of affiliated congregations, and number of new ordained clergy under the age

of 40. Less than ten percent of its affiliated congregations are growing in attendance and other vital signs

of participation. As well, less than ten percent of its affiliated congregations are 25 or fewer years old.

National gatherings focus on an acceptance that they are a much smaller denomination than they once

were, and wondering how many more years they will exist. Clergy hope it will exist until they retire; as

does denominational staff. Attendance is declining as fewer churches can afford to send their delegates.

Many, if not all, of the various institutions started by these denominations have been closed, sold, or

given their freedom so they might survive.

Questions

Which one of these five pathways best fits your national denomination? What ranges or metrics would

you change to make one of these fit your denomination better? What additional factors occur to you that

ought to be added to the list of ten I have used as a jumping off place? What other comments would you

add? I would welcome your comments to me at GBullard@TheColumbiaPartnership.org.

Answers

“OK, George. You have given us the assessment. What are the answers?”

I would like for you to ponder the assessment for a while before we move on to the solution. This part one

article is being posted on Monday, April 5, 2010. I will seek to post a part two article with some solutions I

see some time in the next seven to ten days.

Important Things to Know

George Bullard is a Ministry Partner with The Columbia Partnership. He is also General Secretary [executive director]

of the North American Baptist Fellowship of the Baptist World Alliance. The Columbia Partnership is a non-profit

Christian ministry organization focused on transforming the capacity of the North American Church to pursue and

sustain Christ-centered ministry. Travel Free Learning is a leadership development emphasis. For more information

about products and services check out the web site at www.TheColumbiaPartnership.org, send an e-mail to

Client.Care@TheColumbiaPartnership.org, or call 803.622.0923.

The Coming Death of National Denominations by George Bullard

Posted on March 29, 2010 by in Idea Sharing, Organization

Attached is a article from George Bullard on The Coming Death of National Denominations. I think it identifies several issues all of us in denominational leadership roles need to consider.  It is my personal opinion that there is and will be a need for denominations, but they must morph to stay effective. In this blog George shares some of the way this may happen.

Mel

http://columbiapartnership.typepad.com/the_columbia_partnership/2010/03/the-coming-death-of-national-denominations.html

The Coming Death of National Denominations

A Travel Free Learning Article

By George Bullard, Ministry Partner with The Columbia Partnership

Voice: 803.622.0923, E-mail: GBullard@TheColumbiaPartnership.org, Web Site: www.TheColumbiaPartnership.org

Many national denominational organizations in North America are dying. The causes and signs of their demise are obvious, but few are choosing to make wise decisions to morph into 21st century denominations. Too many are choosing to recommit to old patterns or suicidal patterns of denominational life.

The death of national denominations is not imminent; it is not coming in the next five to ten years. However, if current trends continue some national denominations could reach subsistence level within 25 years. The death of national denominational structures does not necessarily mean the death of the denomination itself or its regional or middle judicatory expressions. These latter expressions may thrive in some locations.

Here is a beginning list of things national denominations are failing to do or succeeding in doing to drag themselves down. What would you add to this list?

Denominations are dying because of their failure to do the following things.

First, they are failing to renew themselves, and sustain vitality and vibrancy, by being catalysts for the starting a number of new congregations each year equal to at least three percent of the number of congregations affiliated with it at the beginning of the year. Without a high priority focus on new congregations, national denominations are missing two factors.

1. Sufficient numerical growth in affiliated congregations and adherents to offset the loss of congregations and adherents through congregations who are dying, declining, or dis-affiliating.

2. Increased vitality and vibrancy throughout the denomination that comes through the excitement surrounding new congregations and the challenge they offer to existing congregations to be more intentional about their ministry.

Second, they are failing to help their leading edge of faithful, effective, and innovative congregations to soar and fully express their spiritual gifts, strengths, and skills. These congregations are generally 10 to 15 percent of the total number of congregations affiliated with the denomination, but may account –along with new congregations—for at least 50 percent of the new adherents in the denominations.

Denominations assume these congregations do not need or want their help rather than realizing they want high quality peer learning experiences than the vast majority of denominations are offering. They would love to help their denomination soar, and they yearn for their denomination to understand and celebrate their situation.

Third, they are failing to help only those congregations who are ready and eager to transform to go through transformation processes. Instead they are trying to help any plateaued and declining congregation who asks for help regardless of their capacity to benefit from the assistance or their readiness for transformation. Further, they define transformation as a healthy, faithful congregation rather than one that is also effective and innovative in fulfilling their mission and vision and thus becoming more vital and vibrant. Thus, they have lowered their expectations of congregations. Faithfulness has become a euphemism for mediocrity.

Fourth, perhaps worse than ineffective service to congregations is the diminishing of an emphasis on serving congregations, or helping to create and sustain more vital and vibrant congregations. Over the past several decades numerous denominations have decreased their efforts through staff, budget, and resource materials that focus on church planting, church growth, and church transformation. Some national denominations have one office or department that seeks to handle all three of these emphases. Denominations are forgetting that congregations are their basic building block and why they exist in the first place.

From another perspective, national denominations are trying to serve congregations through old concepts that assume national denominations do for congregations what congregations cannot do for themselves. This is a gapology approach that no longer works. The number of things congregations are dependent on their denomination to do are less and less.

Fifth, they are failing to jettison their institutions from core denominational financial support and ownership through trustees appointed or elected by the national denomination. Over the past five decades many, if not most, colleges/universities, seminaries/divinity schools, benevolent institutions, and other institutional entities have developed multiple funding streams and are not longer dependent on the national denominational budget for their survival and vitality.

Wise national denominations are withdrawing core operational funding and creating partnerships with their institutions in strategic areas of need for the denomination, and funding those on a renewable project basis. Institutions that cannot survive without funding from the national denomination for core operations may not need to exist in the 21st century.

Denominations are dying because of their success in doing the following things.

First, many national denominations are demanding loyalty rather than earning loyalty. Congregations who respond to the call for more loyalty tend not to be the growing, vital, and vibrant congregations, but rather are the plateaued, declining, and passive congregations. Dying denominations are successful in reinforcing the myth that congregations exist to serve the denomination.

Second, many national denominations are professionalizing, formalizing, and centralizing their clergy education, credentialing, and support systems in an attempt to achieve a purer and more effective collection of clergy leaders. This approach certainly provides more control and creates more dependency among the clergy leaders, but is does not necessarily produce purer or more effective clergy leaders. It may also result in a lack of sufficient new clergy leaders, as persons called into clergy ministry seek out denominational families with a more open and flexible system.

Third, some national denominations have become experts at dividing and driving away congregations and adherents by badly addressing explosive moral and theological issues. The big ones these days focus around sex—homosexuality, promiscuity, and pedophilia. When national denominations combine with sex the issues around clergy ordination and discipline—or lack thereof—it creates an “ensmallment” movement within the denomination.

Fourth, many national denominations believe that restructuring themselves or re-tasking national agencies is the same thing as renewing the spiritual, strategic direction of the national denomination. No consistent evidence exists that restructuring national denominations alone leads to the renewal of these denominations. Restructuring actually is a step in preparing for another restructuring within five to ten years. Restructuring fits in the same category as rearranging the chairs on the Titanic.

Fifth, many national denominations continually reallocate their core funding stream receipts from congregations rather than looking for innovative ways to increase the generosity of adherents and congregations. They have a basic funding stream or two that they have had for several decades rather than an innovative plan involving at least 12 funding streams. The reallocation is in response to a decreased buying power of the funds coming from congregations, and like restructuring leads to the next reallocation.

Important Things to Know

George Bullard is a Ministry Partner with The Columbia Partnership. He is also General Secretary [executive director] of the North American Baptist Fellowship of the Baptist World Alliance. The Columbia Partnership is a non-profit Christian ministry organization focused on transforming the capacity of the North American Church to pursue and sustain Christ-centered ministry. Travel Free Learning is a leadership development emphasis. For more information about products and services check out the web site at www.TheColumbiaPartnership.org, send an e-mail to Client.Care@TheColumbiaPartnership.org, or call 803.622.0923.