suc-cess |s?k'ses|
noun
the accomplishment of an aim
 How does the church define success? It seems the only valid aim in evangelical circles is numbers. How many bums in the seats, how many $$ in the offering and how many baptisms each quarter. I'm not going to rant against that attitude. That's the measuring stick for success I was trained with. At Bible College, the pastors that were invited to speak at chapels and conferences were the ones who had churches exploding out the doors, in the midst of major building projects, busy planting dozens of daughter churches, or seeing more salvations than they could handle. Churches that were small and struggling were that way because of sin or leadership ineptitude, I was taught. I'm not sure anymore.
No matter how much I talk and write and study about defining success by faithfulness- a concept I believe to be significantly Biblical- I still can't get past the numbers of success. It informs my foundational perspectives on ministry. Success by the numbers tells me if I've done a good job as a pastor, if we've done a good job as a church. I had a small taste of that kind of success at my last church. Maybe it's some in-built need to have the approval and praise of others. Maybe its a sincere desire to please God. Maybe its just a random stumbling into what God's Spirit happens to be doing in a certain place or at a certain time. I had a pastor friend of mine asked to resign from his church after 5 or 6 years of ministry because of the lack of growth in the church. It was all on him to grow the church. In his case, few congregants took personal responsibility for accomplishing the aim of the church- success by numbers- but hung the pastor out to dry when they didn't grow. The only thing worse, I think, is if the church didn't care, but I'm not sure anymore.
I sometimes wonder what the Gospel is really all about. Is it as personal as we have made it out to be in evangelical circles? The Old Testament is so corporate in its view of salvation. God will retain for Himself a remnant. That remnant theology is all through the Old Testament. Jesus sure picks up on it in his teaching of the Kingdom. Paul says the same things in his letters- all with the English plural "you" in our translations, but somehow we in the evangelical world singularize those "you" statements, and make church all about me. Is the Gospel really just a numbers game? Are we still trying to recapture the Day of Pentecost when 3000 were added to the church? As a pastor, do I hold my first loyalty of service to God? My congregation? My concept of the Gospel? The Bible? My training? Something else? I'm not sure anymore.
I knew a pastor in my early days that came across, at least to me, like a used-car salesman (no offense to used-car salesmen, but society holds them in not much greater esteem than clergy and politicians). He grew his church to over-filling, planted daughter churches, and had a following of people that were incredibly loyal to him. However, when I saw him interact with people, I found him to be manipulative. I vowed I would never knowingly minister like that. It seems that all the large churches that I have seen that are growing and vibrant are led by individuals like that. Well, all but one. I don't understand leaders who do not take no for an answer from their congregants. They have a unique ability to convince someone to do something they just said no to, and seemingly do it willingly. Where is the fall out? From everything I know and understand about people, when they are manipulated, there has to be some kind of emotional, spiritual or other kind of fallout, eventually! Bitterness, rage, brokenness, an unwillingness down the road to say yes ever again, relational separation, something! Is it a matter that these leaders and churches need a steady stream of new people to keep the system working? Maybe I am just completely out to lunch here. I'm not sure any more.
My experience of late leads me to ask these questions, and others. After 20 years in this, how could I be missing the point this badly? Are people just tools to accomplish the goals of the church? I thought people were the point. The reason God sent Jesus to us- to live and die like a man, all the while not sinning and maintaining his divinity. I thought the Kingdom of God was people, under God. I look around at a lot of churches, and there has been a subtle shift from people to numbers. Is this overly cynical of me? I am just some raving ideologue who holds fast to his model, regardless of the facts? I'm not sure anymore.
For those of us on the outside of that kind of church, we need a definition of success that sticks, and we need it pretty soon, or I think we will just be defined by failure.Whatever that is.
|