- The most important person you can lead is yourself.
- Nothing is more valuable than relationships.
- Maximize the moments with your children.
- Listen—you will never find the pulse of your family or organization if you don’t learn to listen.
- Worrying is temporary atheism. Rid yourself of worry.
- Become a better steward of your financial resources through investments and wise decision-making. The older you get the more you’ll want to give away, being able to do so begins with the financial decisions you make today.
- Balance—the words “No” and “Not now” are empowering when accompanied with wisdom.
- Spend time reading and receiving the Truth every morning, because the world will only lie to you the rest of the day.
- Saying “I’m sorry,” when spoken from a genuine heart, has great healing power.
- Character should always trump talent.
- Retreat and Rest—if ships don’t come back to the harbor, they’ll eventually sink.
- Don’t stop learning—you’re not as smart as you think.
- Learn to value patience. You’re likely to learn more while you wait.
- Time management—without it time will control you.
- Develop authentic and deep relationships with men who will sharpen you and see through you.
Showing posts with label Leadership. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leadership. Show all posts
Friday, August 19, 2011
“What are three things you know now that you wish you knew when you were thirty?” [ARTICLE REPRINT]
Thursday, August 4, 2011
AVOID ANY HINT [ARTICLE REPRINT]
Too many pastors have lost credibility because of the appearance of immorality. Don't be one of them.
I had an awkward situation recently. My doctor prescribed a sleep study (part of some health tests I am doing in preparation for my forthcoming new health regimen).
The tech called me to arrange the details. She did not seem to have many details about the clinic, so I asked some questions. One of which was the setting—in this case, it was an office building with several faux bedrooms where they would wire me up and measure me sleeping.
I asked about the staff, and she was "it."
Then came that awkward moment. I knew she would not understand it, but I explained, "I can't come if it is just you and me in the building." It was awkward, and I am guessing few ever said such a thing. So I skipped out on my study (and will probably have to pay the no-show charge).
It might seem silly to you, but let me encourage you not to see it as such. Many of you who read this are young pastors. I know too many pastors who have lost great credibility because of an accusation (let alone an indiscretion).
I am not irresistible. I have a great face for radio. I do not think that anyone will swoon over me. But I do not know the stability, morality, and disposition of people that I meet.
When I told my wife, I thought she might slap me. She has been excited about my recent health plans. However, she was the opposite. She felt protected and affirmed. She knew I would not put our family in jeopardy.
I remember Danny Akin once saying that he would not pick up a woman on the side of the road in the rain if her car broke down. He would never be alone with a woman not his wife. It seemed a bit selfish until he told the rest of the story. He would pull over and give her the keys and let her drive where she needed to be.
Guarding yourself takes work, can be awkward, and is often inconvenient. But one problem averted makes it a good stewardship of your life, ministry, and family.
At the churches I planted, we always used something like Saddleback's Ten Commandments:
Thou shalt not go to lunch alone with the opposite sex.
Thou shalt not have the opposite sex pick you up or drive you places when it is just the two of you.
Thou shalt not kiss any attendee of the opposite sex or show affection that could be questioned.
Thou shalt not visit the opposite sex alone at home.
Thou shalt not counsel the opposite sex alone at the office, and thou shalt not counsel the opposite sex more than once without that person's mate. Refer them.
Thou shalt not discuss detailed sexual problems with the opposite sex in counseling. Refer them.
Thou shalt not discuss your marriage problems with an attendee of the opposite sex.
Thou shalt be careful in answering e-mails, instant messages, chat rooms, cards, or letters from the opposite sex.
Thou shalt make your co-worker your protective ally.
Thou shalt pray for the integrity of other staff members.
(The first four do not apply to unmarried staff.)
I hope you have a list like this for your own life and ministry.
"But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality..." (Ephesians 5:3)
I had an awkward situation recently. My doctor prescribed a sleep study (part of some health tests I am doing in preparation for my forthcoming new health regimen).
The tech called me to arrange the details. She did not seem to have many details about the clinic, so I asked some questions. One of which was the setting—in this case, it was an office building with several faux bedrooms where they would wire me up and measure me sleeping.
I asked about the staff, and she was "it."
Then came that awkward moment. I knew she would not understand it, but I explained, "I can't come if it is just you and me in the building." It was awkward, and I am guessing few ever said such a thing. So I skipped out on my study (and will probably have to pay the no-show charge).
It might seem silly to you, but let me encourage you not to see it as such. Many of you who read this are young pastors. I know too many pastors who have lost great credibility because of an accusation (let alone an indiscretion).
I am not irresistible. I have a great face for radio. I do not think that anyone will swoon over me. But I do not know the stability, morality, and disposition of people that I meet.
When I told my wife, I thought she might slap me. She has been excited about my recent health plans. However, she was the opposite. She felt protected and affirmed. She knew I would not put our family in jeopardy.
I remember Danny Akin once saying that he would not pick up a woman on the side of the road in the rain if her car broke down. He would never be alone with a woman not his wife. It seemed a bit selfish until he told the rest of the story. He would pull over and give her the keys and let her drive where she needed to be.
Guarding yourself takes work, can be awkward, and is often inconvenient. But one problem averted makes it a good stewardship of your life, ministry, and family.
At the churches I planted, we always used something like Saddleback's Ten Commandments:
Thou shalt not go to lunch alone with the opposite sex.
Thou shalt not have the opposite sex pick you up or drive you places when it is just the two of you.
Thou shalt not kiss any attendee of the opposite sex or show affection that could be questioned.
Thou shalt not visit the opposite sex alone at home.
Thou shalt not counsel the opposite sex alone at the office, and thou shalt not counsel the opposite sex more than once without that person's mate. Refer them.
Thou shalt not discuss detailed sexual problems with the opposite sex in counseling. Refer them.
Thou shalt not discuss your marriage problems with an attendee of the opposite sex.
Thou shalt be careful in answering e-mails, instant messages, chat rooms, cards, or letters from the opposite sex.
Thou shalt make your co-worker your protective ally.
Thou shalt pray for the integrity of other staff members.
(The first four do not apply to unmarried staff.)
I hope you have a list like this for your own life and ministry.
"But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality..." (Ephesians 5:3)
Sunday, July 31, 2011
FAMILIES WHERE GRACE IS IN PLACE [ARTICLE REPRINT]
Jeff VanVonderen addresses this in his books, Families Where Grace is in Place and Tired of Trying to Measure Up. He identifies ten characteristics that are found in a shame based system, whether it is a family, a church or a group where a person receives the message that somehow they are defective, inadequate human beings.
Those ten characteristics are:
Out-loud shaming. The message communicated is: "Something is wrong with you"; "You are defective"; "You don't measure up"' "Why can't you be like..."
Performance-orientation. The focus is on doing certain good behaviors and avoiding others as a means of earning love, gaining acceptance, acquiring approval, or proving value. Failure to perform results in shame.
Unspoken rules. Rules or standards that are seldom, if ever, spoken out loud govern behavior. In fact, sometimes the only way they are discovered is when they are broken. There is a "can't-talk-about-it" rule in effect - which means no one is supposed to notice or mention problems; and if you speak out about a problem, you are the problem. This forces people to keep quiet. There is also a "can't-win" rule in effect. For instance, children are taught never to lie; they are also told to never tell Grandma her meatloaf tastes bad. No matter how hard you try to keep these contradictory rules, you always fail to perform. And failure to perform results in shame. These rules tend to govern future relationships, unless they are realized and broken on purpose.
Communicating through "coding." Talking about feelings or needs leaves you feeling ashamed for being so "selfish." Talking about problems breaks the "can't-talk- about-it" rule and gets you shamed for being the problem. Therefore, family members learn to say things in code, or they send messages to each other indirectly through other people.
Idolatry. Family members are taught to turn to things and people other than God's acceptance as the measure of their value and identity. The measuring stick becomes how things look; what people think; religious behavior; acquiring possessions.
Putting kids through a hard time. Kids are involved in the messy and imperfect process of finding out about life. But the family cares most about how things look and what people think. Therefore, just being a kid becomes a shaming thing. Children must learn to act like miniature adults in order to avoid shame.
Preoccupation with fault or blame. Since there is such a focus on performance in this family, lack of performance must be tracked down and eradicated. Fault and blame are the order of the day. The purpose of the question, "Who is responsible?" is to find out who is to blame. That way the culprit can be shamed, humiliated, and made to feel so bad that he won't do the behavior again.
Strong on "head skills." Family members become experts at defending themselves. Blaming, rationalizing, minimizing, and denial are just some of the ways people try to push away the shame message - usually in vain.
Weak on "heart skills." "Can't-feel" is another rule governing this system. Feelings are wrong, selfish, or unnecessary. People in shame-based families don't know how they feel or how to respond to their feelings. These are emotionally reactive places.
Needy people. Because love and acceptance was earned on the basis of behavior, but never received apart from performance, shamed-based families are characterized by members who are empty on the inside, full-looking on the outside.
The response to these characteristics may be, "That's me! I've had that happen all my life." Or, "Oh, no, I do that and I hate it. How do I break out of it?"
Well, I'm not going to tell you. You have to come in for counseling and spend a whole bunch of money. No, actually the solution is found in "grace-full" relationships. It is simple yet like changing any system, it can be demanding.
In the previous article shame was defined as the painful emotion that is experienced when I feel "less than". Somehow I don't measure up or I am inherently flawed. It is about diminished personhood.
Again, the ten characteristics Jeff Van Vonderen identifies that typify shame-based relationships are:
Out-loud shaming
Performance orientation
Unspoken rules
Communicating through "coding"
Idolatry
Putting kids through a hard time
Preoccupation with fault and blame
Strong on "head skills"
Weak on "heart skills"
Needy people
God's grace has been defined a number of ways, the acrostic God's Riches At Christ's Expense or "unmerited favor". Charis is the most common New Testament word. T.H.L. Parker states, "It's basic significance is to be found in joyfulness, whether in regard to the appreciation of things or of people."
In contrast to shame-full relationships, Jeff Van Vonderen defines grace-full relationships as those where individuals receive messages that they are loved and accepted, valuable, and not alone in life.
Ten characteristics of grace-full relationships are:
Out-loud affirming. The message communicated verbally is: "I love you"; "You are so capable"; "I'm here for you when you need me"; "I'm glad God put you in our family"; "I enjoy your company." Use the person's name often.
People-oriented. Members of grace-full families separate people from their behaviors. David Seamands says, "We all need an environment where we feel our needs are met because of who we are and not because of what we do." I might not like the actions of my child and say, "(Name), when you hit your sister, I don't like that behavior, but I do like you." Sometimes God is not real pleased with how I live but he does love me. Romans 5:8 says, "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
Out-loud rules and expectations. Families need rules. They are there to serve the family members rather than family members serving the rules. For this to work everyone must know the rules. Often times in a shame-full family when one identifies the problem, they become the problem. Where as in a grace-full family, if the truth spoken reveals a problem, the problem is addressed rather than attacking the person whom reveals the problem. Have a family time where the preconceived family rules are identified and also some rules that the family would like in place.
Communication is clear and straight. Zechariah 8:16 says, "These are the things which you should do: speak the truth to one another: judge with truth and ... let none of you devise evil in your heart against another, and do not love perjury; for all these things are what I hate, declares the Lord." Truth is the absence of the intent to deceive. Some times what one says is true but the way it is said or what is omitted deceives the hearer.
More commonly people hint at what they would like or desire but do not ask directly. Then they are offended when no one responds. The first person might say, "It sure would be a nice day to go for a drive." To which the second person's reply is, "yes, it is," and then continues to read the paper. The first person becomes upset. This is coding and it doesn't help.
Also, don't triangle or run messages for people. Some one once said, "If you don't have a dog in that fight, stay out of it." If someone gives you a message for someone else in the family or complains to you about another, suggest that they go directly to that person. It is best that you stay out of the loop.
God is the source. As Christians, God is our source. He meets needs, vindicates, defends and is the one who determines our value and acceptance. It may be very "American" to determine one's value by money, position, title, clothes, cars or church attendance, but it is not Biblical. Others thoughts and sometimes actions are beyond ones control. However, only God decides what is true about us. It is OK to be concerned about a child's math grade, but if they fail math, the only fail math. They are not a failure.
Children are enjoyed. Children are free to act like children, consistent with their age appropriate development, rather than expected to act like adults.
Responsibility and accountability. Fault and blame are used in a shame-full family to punish for lack of performance and are used as tools to attempt to control others. People are responsible for their choices and it is appropriate to hold them accountable for behavior. This may involve discipline but it does not mean punishment. It means helping the child learn from the incident. This might occur through consequences received, or it might happen just by talking together.
"Head skills" are used for learning. The key word is "learning" vs. "defending". "Why did you do that?" which usually triggers a defensive response becomes "Help me understand your thinking." Since the other person is already "pre-approved" the focus is on learning or growth. If the thinking is faulty, it can be changed, the behavior will change as well, thus learning or growth occurs.
Feelings are valid and useful. Feelings are not right or wrong, they simply exist. They act as signs that let us know something is going on between us. The choices we make in response to our feelings may be right or wrong, appropriate or inappropriate, damaging or helpful.
It's okay for "outsides" to match "insides. In grace-full families what is real is more important than how things look or maintaining an image. Life is viewed from a progress or process perspective rather than an event perspective. I rejoice in progress. God is not through. Behavior is changing. Unacceptable behavior is about poor choices, not about our value and acceptance as people. Therefore, grace-full family members don?t have to fix one another in order to fix themselves.
Don't become overwhelmed with the above list if it is not characteristic of your family. God and growth are involved. Philippians 1:6 says, "He who began the good work in you will bring it to completion." In everything there is a learning or growth curve. I can choose an area, educate myself and determine before God some practical growth steps. Growth will occur.
Those ten characteristics are:
Out-loud shaming. The message communicated is: "Something is wrong with you"; "You are defective"; "You don't measure up"' "Why can't you be like..."
Performance-orientation. The focus is on doing certain good behaviors and avoiding others as a means of earning love, gaining acceptance, acquiring approval, or proving value. Failure to perform results in shame.
Unspoken rules. Rules or standards that are seldom, if ever, spoken out loud govern behavior. In fact, sometimes the only way they are discovered is when they are broken. There is a "can't-talk-about-it" rule in effect - which means no one is supposed to notice or mention problems; and if you speak out about a problem, you are the problem. This forces people to keep quiet. There is also a "can't-win" rule in effect. For instance, children are taught never to lie; they are also told to never tell Grandma her meatloaf tastes bad. No matter how hard you try to keep these contradictory rules, you always fail to perform. And failure to perform results in shame. These rules tend to govern future relationships, unless they are realized and broken on purpose.
Communicating through "coding." Talking about feelings or needs leaves you feeling ashamed for being so "selfish." Talking about problems breaks the "can't-talk- about-it" rule and gets you shamed for being the problem. Therefore, family members learn to say things in code, or they send messages to each other indirectly through other people.
Idolatry. Family members are taught to turn to things and people other than God's acceptance as the measure of their value and identity. The measuring stick becomes how things look; what people think; religious behavior; acquiring possessions.
Putting kids through a hard time. Kids are involved in the messy and imperfect process of finding out about life. But the family cares most about how things look and what people think. Therefore, just being a kid becomes a shaming thing. Children must learn to act like miniature adults in order to avoid shame.
Preoccupation with fault or blame. Since there is such a focus on performance in this family, lack of performance must be tracked down and eradicated. Fault and blame are the order of the day. The purpose of the question, "Who is responsible?" is to find out who is to blame. That way the culprit can be shamed, humiliated, and made to feel so bad that he won't do the behavior again.
Strong on "head skills." Family members become experts at defending themselves. Blaming, rationalizing, minimizing, and denial are just some of the ways people try to push away the shame message - usually in vain.
Weak on "heart skills." "Can't-feel" is another rule governing this system. Feelings are wrong, selfish, or unnecessary. People in shame-based families don't know how they feel or how to respond to their feelings. These are emotionally reactive places.
Needy people. Because love and acceptance was earned on the basis of behavior, but never received apart from performance, shamed-based families are characterized by members who are empty on the inside, full-looking on the outside.
The response to these characteristics may be, "That's me! I've had that happen all my life." Or, "Oh, no, I do that and I hate it. How do I break out of it?"
Well, I'm not going to tell you. You have to come in for counseling and spend a whole bunch of money. No, actually the solution is found in "grace-full" relationships. It is simple yet like changing any system, it can be demanding.
In the previous article shame was defined as the painful emotion that is experienced when I feel "less than". Somehow I don't measure up or I am inherently flawed. It is about diminished personhood.
Again, the ten characteristics Jeff Van Vonderen identifies that typify shame-based relationships are:
Out-loud shaming
Performance orientation
Unspoken rules
Communicating through "coding"
Idolatry
Putting kids through a hard time
Preoccupation with fault and blame
Strong on "head skills"
Weak on "heart skills"
Needy people
God's grace has been defined a number of ways, the acrostic God's Riches At Christ's Expense or "unmerited favor". Charis is the most common New Testament word. T.H.L. Parker states, "It's basic significance is to be found in joyfulness, whether in regard to the appreciation of things or of people."
In contrast to shame-full relationships, Jeff Van Vonderen defines grace-full relationships as those where individuals receive messages that they are loved and accepted, valuable, and not alone in life.
Ten characteristics of grace-full relationships are:
Out-loud affirming. The message communicated verbally is: "I love you"; "You are so capable"; "I'm here for you when you need me"; "I'm glad God put you in our family"; "I enjoy your company." Use the person's name often.
People-oriented. Members of grace-full families separate people from their behaviors. David Seamands says, "We all need an environment where we feel our needs are met because of who we are and not because of what we do." I might not like the actions of my child and say, "(Name), when you hit your sister, I don't like that behavior, but I do like you." Sometimes God is not real pleased with how I live but he does love me. Romans 5:8 says, "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
Out-loud rules and expectations. Families need rules. They are there to serve the family members rather than family members serving the rules. For this to work everyone must know the rules. Often times in a shame-full family when one identifies the problem, they become the problem. Where as in a grace-full family, if the truth spoken reveals a problem, the problem is addressed rather than attacking the person whom reveals the problem. Have a family time where the preconceived family rules are identified and also some rules that the family would like in place.
Communication is clear and straight. Zechariah 8:16 says, "These are the things which you should do: speak the truth to one another: judge with truth and ... let none of you devise evil in your heart against another, and do not love perjury; for all these things are what I hate, declares the Lord." Truth is the absence of the intent to deceive. Some times what one says is true but the way it is said or what is omitted deceives the hearer.
More commonly people hint at what they would like or desire but do not ask directly. Then they are offended when no one responds. The first person might say, "It sure would be a nice day to go for a drive." To which the second person's reply is, "yes, it is," and then continues to read the paper. The first person becomes upset. This is coding and it doesn't help.
Also, don't triangle or run messages for people. Some one once said, "If you don't have a dog in that fight, stay out of it." If someone gives you a message for someone else in the family or complains to you about another, suggest that they go directly to that person. It is best that you stay out of the loop.
God is the source. As Christians, God is our source. He meets needs, vindicates, defends and is the one who determines our value and acceptance. It may be very "American" to determine one's value by money, position, title, clothes, cars or church attendance, but it is not Biblical. Others thoughts and sometimes actions are beyond ones control. However, only God decides what is true about us. It is OK to be concerned about a child's math grade, but if they fail math, the only fail math. They are not a failure.
Children are enjoyed. Children are free to act like children, consistent with their age appropriate development, rather than expected to act like adults.
Responsibility and accountability. Fault and blame are used in a shame-full family to punish for lack of performance and are used as tools to attempt to control others. People are responsible for their choices and it is appropriate to hold them accountable for behavior. This may involve discipline but it does not mean punishment. It means helping the child learn from the incident. This might occur through consequences received, or it might happen just by talking together.
"Head skills" are used for learning. The key word is "learning" vs. "defending". "Why did you do that?" which usually triggers a defensive response becomes "Help me understand your thinking." Since the other person is already "pre-approved" the focus is on learning or growth. If the thinking is faulty, it can be changed, the behavior will change as well, thus learning or growth occurs.
Feelings are valid and useful. Feelings are not right or wrong, they simply exist. They act as signs that let us know something is going on between us. The choices we make in response to our feelings may be right or wrong, appropriate or inappropriate, damaging or helpful.
It's okay for "outsides" to match "insides. In grace-full families what is real is more important than how things look or maintaining an image. Life is viewed from a progress or process perspective rather than an event perspective. I rejoice in progress. God is not through. Behavior is changing. Unacceptable behavior is about poor choices, not about our value and acceptance as people. Therefore, grace-full family members don?t have to fix one another in order to fix themselves.
Don't become overwhelmed with the above list if it is not characteristic of your family. God and growth are involved. Philippians 1:6 says, "He who began the good work in you will bring it to completion." In everything there is a learning or growth curve. I can choose an area, educate myself and determine before God some practical growth steps. Growth will occur.
Characteristics of a Grace-Filled Family [ARICLE REPRINT]
Out-loud affirming(vs. out-loud shaming). In grace-filled families, members are told they are loved and accepted, capable, valuable, and supported out loud.. Don't expect people to be mind readers: It is not realistic to think that they "just know" that you care.
People-oriented(vs. performance-oriented). We all need and environment where we feel our needs are met because of who we are and not because of what we do. In grace-filled families, love and acceptance does not fluctuate depending upon how people act. People are affirmed for being who they are. In shame-based families, behavior is the most important thing. Who you are comes last.
Out-loud rules and expectations(vs. unspoken rules). In a grace-filled family, rules are there to serve people; people are not there to serve the rules. In shame-based families, the person who says there is a problem becomes the problem. In a grace-filled family the truth spoken or revealed is never the problem, nor is the person who speaks it. The problem is dealt with as a real problem, and a solution is sought.
Communication is clear and straight(vs. coding). If you want someone to take out the garbage, ask them to do so. Don't say,"Sure would be nice if someone would take out the garbage," and then complain when people ignore or miss your coded message. If you'd rather have hamburgers than hotdogs, say so. Don't say,"I don't care, we can have whatever you want," and then pout when you end up with hotdogs.
God is the source(vs. idolatry). As Christians, God is our Source. He is our need-meeter, our vindicator, our defender, the one who has the last word on our value and acceptance. We are not valuable and acceptable because of how much money we make, the clothes we wear, our church attendance, or because we have been faithful in our giving. In supportive relationships, members are pointed towards God's grace, not toward their performance or how things look or what people think. God is always our
only source of hope.
Children are enjoyed(vs. giving kids a hard time). In shame-based families, children must act like little adults in order to keep from being shamed. In grace-filled families, it's okay for them to act like kids. Normal, healthy kids are "messy" about this business of growing-up. As a parent, you do not need to be threatened or take it personally when your children mess-up.
Responsibility and accountability(vs. fault and blame). Fault and blame are used in shame-based families to punish children for their lack of performance. But the bible tells us "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us" (1 John 1:9). In many families, confessing to something gets you shamed, blamed, exposed, and humiliated. Not so in families where grace is in place.
"Head skills" are used for learning(vs. "head skills" used for defending). In grace-filled families, thinking is used for the purpose of learning. In shame-based families it is used to defend, blame, to make excuses, and to get out of being responsible. In shame-based families, the question,"Why did you do that?" is a trap. In grace-filled families people are pre-approved, and the question "Why did you do that?" is just a simple inquiry to understand the reason why something was done.
Feelings are valid and useful(vs. weak on "heart skills"). Feelings are not right
or wrong, they simply exist. Grace-filled families recognize the feeling and expression of emotions as opportunities for family members to connect with one another.
It's okay for outsides to match insides(vs. empty people learning to act filled). In grace-filled families, what is real is more important than how things look. Life is seen with a process perspective rather than an event perspective. Unacceptable behaviors are about poor choices, not about our value and acceptance as people.
People-oriented(vs. performance-oriented). We all need and environment where we feel our needs are met because of who we are and not because of what we do. In grace-filled families, love and acceptance does not fluctuate depending upon how people act. People are affirmed for being who they are. In shame-based families, behavior is the most important thing. Who you are comes last.
Out-loud rules and expectations(vs. unspoken rules). In a grace-filled family, rules are there to serve people; people are not there to serve the rules. In shame-based families, the person who says there is a problem becomes the problem. In a grace-filled family the truth spoken or revealed is never the problem, nor is the person who speaks it. The problem is dealt with as a real problem, and a solution is sought.
Communication is clear and straight(vs. coding). If you want someone to take out the garbage, ask them to do so. Don't say,"Sure would be nice if someone would take out the garbage," and then complain when people ignore or miss your coded message. If you'd rather have hamburgers than hotdogs, say so. Don't say,"I don't care, we can have whatever you want," and then pout when you end up with hotdogs.
God is the source(vs. idolatry). As Christians, God is our Source. He is our need-meeter, our vindicator, our defender, the one who has the last word on our value and acceptance. We are not valuable and acceptable because of how much money we make, the clothes we wear, our church attendance, or because we have been faithful in our giving. In supportive relationships, members are pointed towards God's grace, not toward their performance or how things look or what people think. God is always our
only source of hope.
Children are enjoyed(vs. giving kids a hard time). In shame-based families, children must act like little adults in order to keep from being shamed. In grace-filled families, it's okay for them to act like kids. Normal, healthy kids are "messy" about this business of growing-up. As a parent, you do not need to be threatened or take it personally when your children mess-up.
Responsibility and accountability(vs. fault and blame). Fault and blame are used in shame-based families to punish children for their lack of performance. But the bible tells us "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us" (1 John 1:9). In many families, confessing to something gets you shamed, blamed, exposed, and humiliated. Not so in families where grace is in place.
"Head skills" are used for learning(vs. "head skills" used for defending). In grace-filled families, thinking is used for the purpose of learning. In shame-based families it is used to defend, blame, to make excuses, and to get out of being responsible. In shame-based families, the question,"Why did you do that?" is a trap. In grace-filled families people are pre-approved, and the question "Why did you do that?" is just a simple inquiry to understand the reason why something was done.
Feelings are valid and useful(vs. weak on "heart skills"). Feelings are not right
or wrong, they simply exist. Grace-filled families recognize the feeling and expression of emotions as opportunities for family members to connect with one another.
It's okay for outsides to match insides(vs. empty people learning to act filled). In grace-filled families, what is real is more important than how things look. Life is seen with a process perspective rather than an event perspective. Unacceptable behaviors are about poor choices, not about our value and acceptance as people.
The Subtle Power Of Spiritual Abuse [ARTICLE REPRINT]
The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse, the authors list the following seven characteristics of shame-based relationships which will help explain why people are "caught up" in these abusive relationships:
1. OUT-LOUD SHAMING The dynamic: This is the "shame on you" that comes from belittling. It is any message communicated out loud that says, "Something is wrong with you."
The effects: Negative view of self, even self-hatred.
2. FOCUS ON PERFORMANCE The dynamic: How people act is more important than who they are. Love and acceptance are earned by doing or not doing certain things.
The effects: Perfectionism, or giving up without trying; view of God as more concerned with how you act than who you are; cannot ask for help; high need for the approval of others.
3. MANIPULATION The dynamic: Relationships and behaviors are manipulated by very powerful unspoken rules. Yet the unspoken rules communicate these and other shaming messages.
Coding: Messages are sent through a verbal code that others are supposed to decode. "Don't you think it would be better this way?" means, "I want you to do it this way."
Triangling: This means to send a message to someone through another person, instead of delivering it directly.
The effects: Great "radar" - the ability to pick up tension in situations and relationships; ability to decode messages; talking about people instead of to them; difficulty trusting people.
4. IDOLATRY The dynamic: The "god" served by the shame-based relationship system is an impossible-to-please judge. It is a god invented to enforce the performance standard.
The effects: Distorted image of God; high level of anxiety; high need to control thoughts, feelings and behaviors of others.
5. PREOCCUPATION WITH FAULT AND BLAME The dynamic: Reaction is swift and furious toward the one who fails to perform the way the system deems fit. Responsibility and accountability are not the issues here: Fault and blame are the issues.The shame-based system wants a confession in order to know whom to shame.
The effects: The sense that if something is wrong or someone is upset you must have caused it; a high need to be punished for or to pay for mistakes in order to feel good about yourself; difficulty forgiving self.
6. OBSCURED REALITY The dynamic: Members are to deny any thought that is different than those of people in authority. Anything that has the potential to shame those in authority is ignored or denied. Interaction with people and places outside the system threatens the order of things. Consequently, you can't find out what "normal" is. Problems are denied, and therefore they remain.
The effects: Out-of-touch with feelings, needs, thoughts; ignoring your "radar" because you are being "too critical;" feel like no one else understands you; threatened by opinions that differ from yours; suspicious or afraid of others.
7. UNBALANCED INTERRELATEDNESS The dynamic: Either under involved or over involved with each other. Consequently, rules take the place of people. There is no relationship structure in which to learn about behaviors and consequences. People find out about life alone and by accident.
The effects: Fear of being deserted; high need for structure; a sense that if there is a problem, you have to solve it; feeling selfish for having needs; putting up boundaries that keep safe people away; feelings of guilt when you haven't done anything wrong.
1. OUT-LOUD SHAMING The dynamic: This is the "shame on you" that comes from belittling. It is any message communicated out loud that says, "Something is wrong with you."
The effects: Negative view of self, even self-hatred.
2. FOCUS ON PERFORMANCE The dynamic: How people act is more important than who they are. Love and acceptance are earned by doing or not doing certain things.
The effects: Perfectionism, or giving up without trying; view of God as more concerned with how you act than who you are; cannot ask for help; high need for the approval of others.
3. MANIPULATION The dynamic: Relationships and behaviors are manipulated by very powerful unspoken rules. Yet the unspoken rules communicate these and other shaming messages.
Coding: Messages are sent through a verbal code that others are supposed to decode. "Don't you think it would be better this way?" means, "I want you to do it this way."
Triangling: This means to send a message to someone through another person, instead of delivering it directly.
The effects: Great "radar" - the ability to pick up tension in situations and relationships; ability to decode messages; talking about people instead of to them; difficulty trusting people.
4. IDOLATRY The dynamic: The "god" served by the shame-based relationship system is an impossible-to-please judge. It is a god invented to enforce the performance standard.
The effects: Distorted image of God; high level of anxiety; high need to control thoughts, feelings and behaviors of others.
5. PREOCCUPATION WITH FAULT AND BLAME The dynamic: Reaction is swift and furious toward the one who fails to perform the way the system deems fit. Responsibility and accountability are not the issues here: Fault and blame are the issues.The shame-based system wants a confession in order to know whom to shame.
The effects: The sense that if something is wrong or someone is upset you must have caused it; a high need to be punished for or to pay for mistakes in order to feel good about yourself; difficulty forgiving self.
6. OBSCURED REALITY The dynamic: Members are to deny any thought that is different than those of people in authority. Anything that has the potential to shame those in authority is ignored or denied. Interaction with people and places outside the system threatens the order of things. Consequently, you can't find out what "normal" is. Problems are denied, and therefore they remain.
The effects: Out-of-touch with feelings, needs, thoughts; ignoring your "radar" because you are being "too critical;" feel like no one else understands you; threatened by opinions that differ from yours; suspicious or afraid of others.
7. UNBALANCED INTERRELATEDNESS The dynamic: Either under involved or over involved with each other. Consequently, rules take the place of people. There is no relationship structure in which to learn about behaviors and consequences. People find out about life alone and by accident.
The effects: Fear of being deserted; high need for structure; a sense that if there is a problem, you have to solve it; feeling selfish for having needs; putting up boundaries that keep safe people away; feelings of guilt when you haven't done anything wrong.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Barna Describes Religious Changes Among Busters, Boomers, and Elders Since 1991 [ARTICLE REPRINT]
July 27, 2011
The three oldest generational segments of America’s population have been actively redefining their faith over the past two decades. A new analysis of Barna Group data from nationwide tracking surveys covering the last two decades reveals that in regard to 14 religious variables examined, each of the generational segments has experienced significant change concerning about half of those variables. On the heels of the release of his latest trends book, Futurecast, author and researcher George Barna added this generational analysis as part of the State of the Church series of reports from the Barna Group.
Young Adults: Baby Busters
An examination of the behavior and beliefs of adults born after the Boomer generation – i.e., those born from 1965 through 1983 – showed that there has been a lot of realignment taking place within this segment. Three of the six religious behaviors and five of the eight religious beliefs have undergone statistically significant change since 1991.
Among the behaviors that have shifted were:
Bible reading undertaken during the week preceding the survey interview, excluding reading that occurred during church events, jumped nine percentage points, reaching 41% in 2011.
Volunteering at a church during a typical week also grew by nine percentage points. The proportion climbed to 19% in 2011.
The proportion of unchurched Busters – i.e., those who had not attended any church services during the past six months, not including special events such as weddings or funerals – hit 39% in 2011. That represented an eight percentage point increase since 1991.
Five belief-oriented measures also witnessed significant change among the Busters during the past twenty years.
The percentage of Busters who describe themselves as Christians increased by nine points. Currently, 80% embrace that label.
Making a personal commitment to Jesus Christ became much more fashionable among Busters during the last twenty years. Sixty percent of Busters have done so, a rise of 12 percentage points since 1991.
Busters have become less indifferent toward the existence of Satan. Since 1991 there has been a ten percentage point drop in those who believe that Satan is simply a symbol of evil but not a living entity. However, a majority of Busters (55%) still concur that Satan is not a living being.
Busters are less prone to believe that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches than they were twenty years ago. The proportion of those who strongly affirm the complete accuracy of the Bible’s principles has declined by 11 percentage points during that time, dropping to 35%.
Being born again is more common today than ever among Busters. In 1991, only 23% met the criteria – saying they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life, as well as believing that they will experience eternal salvation only because they have confessed their sins and accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. In 2011, 37% of Busters could be classified as born again.
The World Changers: Baby Boomers
No generation has been as widely chronicled as the Boomers, the post-war group born from 1946 through 1964. At every stage of their existence, this generation has redefined America’s ways of life – including its faith and spirituality. Four of their six religious behaviors and two of their eight religious beliefs tracked in this study have undergone statistically significant change since 1991.
The four religious behaviors that shifted included the following.
Church attendance plummeted by 12 percentage points, dipping to 38% in 2011.
Sunday school attendance by Boomers fell by nine points, from 23% in 1991 to just 14% in 2011.
Volunteering at churches was less likely among Boomers in 2011 than was the case twenty years ago, declining from 28% in 1991 to 18% in 2011.
While the Boomers have never been the generation most likely to attend church, during the past 20 years the percentage of unchurched Boomers has risen dramatically, jumping up 18 points! At 41%, they are now the generation most likely to be unchurched, surpassing the 39% level among Busters.
The pair of religious beliefs that have yielded substantial change in the last two decades are declines in those who hold an orthodox view of God (down six points, to 67%); and a reduction in those who are strongly convinced that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches (down seven points, to just 38%).
The pre-Boomer Segments – aka the Elders
This generational equivalent is a combination of the Builders (1927-1945) and Seniors (born prior to 1927), representing adults who are presently 66 or older. While many might assume that there would be little change in the spiritual lives of these folks, other than that brought on by physical infirmities, the survey data paint a different picture. Four of the six behaviors tracked experienced significant changes, and three of the eight beliefs followed also showed noteworthy shifts.
The four behavioral shifts involved these dimensions:
Sunday school attendance dropped by eight points, from 28% in 1991 to 20% today.
Bible reading undertaken during the past week, apart from such reading during church events, declined by eight points as well, moving from 54% to 46%.
Unexpectedly, older Americans have gradually become more open to attending large churches. During the last 20 years there has been a 12-point increase in Elders who now attend a church of 600 or more people. Neither of the other generations reflected any proportional change in this dimension, suggesting that the growth in attendance at large churches is predominantly attributable to either transfer growth among post-Elders or to Elders leaving small churches in favor of larger communities of faith.
The proportion of unchurched climbed eight points since 1991 among this group. Today three out of ten adults 66 or older (29%) are unchurched.
These are the trio of beliefs that experienced significant change since 1991.
The number of Elders who have made a personal commitment to Jesus that is still important in their life these days rose by ten percentage points. That level now stands at three out of every four elderly Americans (76%).
Concurrently, the percentage of Elders who meet the born again criteria (described above) increased by 11 points. Elders are far more likely than their younger colleagues to be classified, based on their beliefs rather than self-identification, as born again (49%).
The proportion of Elders who believe that “God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the universe who continues to rule that world today” has dropped by nine percentage points. Presently 71% have adopted that view, down from 80% in 1991.
In light of these results, George Barna has provided interpretive comments regarding these trends on his blog site, georgebarna.com. During the coming week (August 1 - 4) Barna will release four additional summaries regarding how the 14 religious factors tracked since 1991 have shifted according to people’s region, gender, ethnicity, and religious affiliation. He will also continue to provide commentary after each release on his blog site.
These Updates come shortly after the release of Barna’s newest book, Futurecast, which examines national trends in a wide array of areas including family, lifestyles, entertainment, technology, values, attitudes, demographics, and media consumption, in addition to religious beliefs and behaviors.
To read additional commentary about these trends, and to leave your own thoughts, go to georgebarna.com
The data from which the trends are drawn is based on the annual OmniPoll™ survey conducted by the Barna Group each January of 1,000 or more adults. The 1991 survey included 1,005 adults randomly selected from across the United States. The comparable 2011 survey included 1,621 randomly chosen adults. Although the Barna Group has been conducting such research since 1984, it was not until 1991 that many of the core tracking questions used by the company were developed and then followed annually.
About Barna Group
Barna Group (which includes its research division, the Barna Research Group) is a private, non-partisan, for-profit organization under the umbrella of the Issachar Companies. It conducts primary research, produces media resources pertaining to spiritual development, and facilitates the healthy spiritual growth of leaders, children, families and Christian ministries.
Located in Ventura, California, Barna Group has been conducting and analyzing primary research to understand cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors since 1984. If you would like to receive free e-mail notification of the release of each new, bi-monthly update on the latest research findings from the Barna Group, you may subscribe to this free service at the Barna website (www.barna.org). Additional research-based resources are also available through this website.
© Barna Group, 2011.
The three oldest generational segments of America’s population have been actively redefining their faith over the past two decades. A new analysis of Barna Group data from nationwide tracking surveys covering the last two decades reveals that in regard to 14 religious variables examined, each of the generational segments has experienced significant change concerning about half of those variables. On the heels of the release of his latest trends book, Futurecast, author and researcher George Barna added this generational analysis as part of the State of the Church series of reports from the Barna Group.
Young Adults: Baby Busters
An examination of the behavior and beliefs of adults born after the Boomer generation – i.e., those born from 1965 through 1983 – showed that there has been a lot of realignment taking place within this segment. Three of the six religious behaviors and five of the eight religious beliefs have undergone statistically significant change since 1991.
Among the behaviors that have shifted were:
Bible reading undertaken during the week preceding the survey interview, excluding reading that occurred during church events, jumped nine percentage points, reaching 41% in 2011.
Volunteering at a church during a typical week also grew by nine percentage points. The proportion climbed to 19% in 2011.
The proportion of unchurched Busters – i.e., those who had not attended any church services during the past six months, not including special events such as weddings or funerals – hit 39% in 2011. That represented an eight percentage point increase since 1991.
Five belief-oriented measures also witnessed significant change among the Busters during the past twenty years.
The percentage of Busters who describe themselves as Christians increased by nine points. Currently, 80% embrace that label.
Making a personal commitment to Jesus Christ became much more fashionable among Busters during the last twenty years. Sixty percent of Busters have done so, a rise of 12 percentage points since 1991.
Busters have become less indifferent toward the existence of Satan. Since 1991 there has been a ten percentage point drop in those who believe that Satan is simply a symbol of evil but not a living entity. However, a majority of Busters (55%) still concur that Satan is not a living being.
Busters are less prone to believe that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches than they were twenty years ago. The proportion of those who strongly affirm the complete accuracy of the Bible’s principles has declined by 11 percentage points during that time, dropping to 35%.
Being born again is more common today than ever among Busters. In 1991, only 23% met the criteria – saying they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life, as well as believing that they will experience eternal salvation only because they have confessed their sins and accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. In 2011, 37% of Busters could be classified as born again.
The World Changers: Baby Boomers
No generation has been as widely chronicled as the Boomers, the post-war group born from 1946 through 1964. At every stage of their existence, this generation has redefined America’s ways of life – including its faith and spirituality. Four of their six religious behaviors and two of their eight religious beliefs tracked in this study have undergone statistically significant change since 1991.
The four religious behaviors that shifted included the following.
Church attendance plummeted by 12 percentage points, dipping to 38% in 2011.
Sunday school attendance by Boomers fell by nine points, from 23% in 1991 to just 14% in 2011.
Volunteering at churches was less likely among Boomers in 2011 than was the case twenty years ago, declining from 28% in 1991 to 18% in 2011.
While the Boomers have never been the generation most likely to attend church, during the past 20 years the percentage of unchurched Boomers has risen dramatically, jumping up 18 points! At 41%, they are now the generation most likely to be unchurched, surpassing the 39% level among Busters.
The pair of religious beliefs that have yielded substantial change in the last two decades are declines in those who hold an orthodox view of God (down six points, to 67%); and a reduction in those who are strongly convinced that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches (down seven points, to just 38%).
The pre-Boomer Segments – aka the Elders
This generational equivalent is a combination of the Builders (1927-1945) and Seniors (born prior to 1927), representing adults who are presently 66 or older. While many might assume that there would be little change in the spiritual lives of these folks, other than that brought on by physical infirmities, the survey data paint a different picture. Four of the six behaviors tracked experienced significant changes, and three of the eight beliefs followed also showed noteworthy shifts.
The four behavioral shifts involved these dimensions:
Sunday school attendance dropped by eight points, from 28% in 1991 to 20% today.
Bible reading undertaken during the past week, apart from such reading during church events, declined by eight points as well, moving from 54% to 46%.
Unexpectedly, older Americans have gradually become more open to attending large churches. During the last 20 years there has been a 12-point increase in Elders who now attend a church of 600 or more people. Neither of the other generations reflected any proportional change in this dimension, suggesting that the growth in attendance at large churches is predominantly attributable to either transfer growth among post-Elders or to Elders leaving small churches in favor of larger communities of faith.
The proportion of unchurched climbed eight points since 1991 among this group. Today three out of ten adults 66 or older (29%) are unchurched.
These are the trio of beliefs that experienced significant change since 1991.
The number of Elders who have made a personal commitment to Jesus that is still important in their life these days rose by ten percentage points. That level now stands at three out of every four elderly Americans (76%).
Concurrently, the percentage of Elders who meet the born again criteria (described above) increased by 11 points. Elders are far more likely than their younger colleagues to be classified, based on their beliefs rather than self-identification, as born again (49%).
The proportion of Elders who believe that “God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the universe who continues to rule that world today” has dropped by nine percentage points. Presently 71% have adopted that view, down from 80% in 1991.
In light of these results, George Barna has provided interpretive comments regarding these trends on his blog site, georgebarna.com. During the coming week (August 1 - 4) Barna will release four additional summaries regarding how the 14 religious factors tracked since 1991 have shifted according to people’s region, gender, ethnicity, and religious affiliation. He will also continue to provide commentary after each release on his blog site.
These Updates come shortly after the release of Barna’s newest book, Futurecast, which examines national trends in a wide array of areas including family, lifestyles, entertainment, technology, values, attitudes, demographics, and media consumption, in addition to religious beliefs and behaviors.
To read additional commentary about these trends, and to leave your own thoughts, go to georgebarna.com
The data from which the trends are drawn is based on the annual OmniPoll™ survey conducted by the Barna Group each January of 1,000 or more adults. The 1991 survey included 1,005 adults randomly selected from across the United States. The comparable 2011 survey included 1,621 randomly chosen adults. Although the Barna Group has been conducting such research since 1984, it was not until 1991 that many of the core tracking questions used by the company were developed and then followed annually.
About Barna Group
Barna Group (which includes its research division, the Barna Research Group) is a private, non-partisan, for-profit organization under the umbrella of the Issachar Companies. It conducts primary research, produces media resources pertaining to spiritual development, and facilitates the healthy spiritual growth of leaders, children, families and Christian ministries.
Located in Ventura, California, Barna Group has been conducting and analyzing primary research to understand cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors since 1984. If you would like to receive free e-mail notification of the release of each new, bi-monthly update on the latest research findings from the Barna Group, you may subscribe to this free service at the Barna website (www.barna.org). Additional research-based resources are also available through this website.
© Barna Group, 2011.
Barna Examines Trends in 14 Religious Factors over 20 Years (1991 to 2011) [ARTICLE REPRINT]
July 26, 2011
George Barna, author of the new trends book Futurecast, has just released the first in a series of assessments of how America’s faith has shifted in the past 20 years on 14 religious variables. In the series of briefs, Barna explores not only the aggregate national patterns, but also digs into how matters have changed according to gender, ethnicity, region, generation, and religious segments.
Religious Behavior
An examination of six religious behaviors tracked over the past 20 years among American adults shows that five of the six experienced statistically significant changes during that time frame.
Bible reading undertaken during the course of a typical week, other than passages read while attending church events, has declined by five percentage points. Currently an estimated 40% of adults read the Bible during a typical week.
Church volunteerism has dropped by eight percentage points since 1991. Presently, slightly less than one out of every five adults (19%) donates some of their time in a typical week to serving at a church.
Adult Sunday school attendance has also diminished by eight percentage points over the past two decades. On any given Sunday, about 15% of adults can be expected to show up in a Sunday school class.
The most carefully watched church-related statistic is adult attendance. Since 1991, attendance has receded by nine percentage points, dropping from 49% in 1991 to 40% in 2011.
The most prolific change in religious behavior among those measured has been the increase in the percentage of adults categorized as unchurched. The Barna Group definition includes all adults who have not attended any religious events at a church, other than special ceremonies such as a wedding or funeral, during the prior six month period. In 1991, just one-quarter of adults (24%) were unchurched. That figure has ballooned by more than 50%, to 37% today.
The only behavior that did not experience any real change was the percentage of adults who attend a church of 600 or more people.
Religious Beliefs
The Barna summary included eight beliefs that have been tracked since 1991. Among those just three experienced statistically significant change.
The percentage of adults who can be classified as born again Christians, based on their belief that they will experience eternal salvation based on their commitment to Jesus Christ, personal confession of sins, and acceptance of Christ as their savior, has risen by five percentage points. In 1991, the national estimate was 35% of adults met those criteria. Currently, 40% of adults can be classified as born again.
When asked to choose one of several descriptions of God, the proportion who believe that God is “the all-knowing, all-powerful and perfect Creator of the universe who still rules the world today” currently stands at two-thirds of the public (67%). That represents a seven point drop from the 1991 level.
The biggest shift has been in people’s perceptions of the Bible. In 1991, 46% of adults strongly affirmed that “the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches.” That has slumped to just 38% who offer the same affirmation today.
Among the religious beliefs that have remained relatively constant over the past 20 years were the percentage of adults who describe themselves as Christian (84%); those who say their religious faith is very important in their life today (56%); those who have made a “personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in my life today” (65%); the proportion who agree that Satan is not a living entity but merely a symbol of evil (56%); those who strongly believe that they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs with others who believe differently (25%).
George Barna commented on the significance of these trends on his blog site, www.georgebarna.com, and indicated that over the next eight days he will release five additional summaries of how the fourteen factors tracked since 1991 have shifted among regions, generations, genders, ethnicities, and religious segments. He will also continue to provide commentary after each release on his blog site.
These Updates come shortly after the release of Barna’s newest book, Futurecast, which examines national trends in a wide array of areas including family, lifestyles, entertainment, technology, values, attitudes, demographics, and media consumption, in addition to religious beliefs and behaviors.
To read additional commentary about these trends, and to leave your own thoughts, go to www.georgebarna.com
The data from which the trends are drawn is based on the annual OmniPollSM survey conducted by The Barna Group each January of 1,000 or more adults. The 1991 survey included 1,005 adults randomly selected from across the United States. The comparable 2011 survey included 1,621 randomly chosen adults. Although the Barna Group has been conducting such research since 1984, it was not until 1991 that many of the core tracking questions used by the company were developed and then followed annually.
About Barna Group
Barna Group (which includes its research division, the Barna Research Group) is a private, non-partisan, for-profit organization under the umbrella of the Issachar Companies. It conducts primary research, produces media resources pertaining to spiritual development, and facilitates the healthy spiritual growth of leaders, children, families and Christian ministries.
Located in Ventura, California, Barna Group has been conducting and analyzing primary research to understand cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors since 1984. If you would like to receive free e-mail notification of the release of each new, bi-monthly update on the latest research findings from the Barna Group, you may subscribe to this free service at the Barna website (www.barna.org). Additional research-based resources are also available through this website.
© Barna Group, 2011.
George Barna, author of the new trends book Futurecast, has just released the first in a series of assessments of how America’s faith has shifted in the past 20 years on 14 religious variables. In the series of briefs, Barna explores not only the aggregate national patterns, but also digs into how matters have changed according to gender, ethnicity, region, generation, and religious segments.
Religious Behavior
An examination of six religious behaviors tracked over the past 20 years among American adults shows that five of the six experienced statistically significant changes during that time frame.
Bible reading undertaken during the course of a typical week, other than passages read while attending church events, has declined by five percentage points. Currently an estimated 40% of adults read the Bible during a typical week.
Church volunteerism has dropped by eight percentage points since 1991. Presently, slightly less than one out of every five adults (19%) donates some of their time in a typical week to serving at a church.
Adult Sunday school attendance has also diminished by eight percentage points over the past two decades. On any given Sunday, about 15% of adults can be expected to show up in a Sunday school class.
The most carefully watched church-related statistic is adult attendance. Since 1991, attendance has receded by nine percentage points, dropping from 49% in 1991 to 40% in 2011.
The most prolific change in religious behavior among those measured has been the increase in the percentage of adults categorized as unchurched. The Barna Group definition includes all adults who have not attended any religious events at a church, other than special ceremonies such as a wedding or funeral, during the prior six month period. In 1991, just one-quarter of adults (24%) were unchurched. That figure has ballooned by more than 50%, to 37% today.
The only behavior that did not experience any real change was the percentage of adults who attend a church of 600 or more people.
Religious Beliefs
The Barna summary included eight beliefs that have been tracked since 1991. Among those just three experienced statistically significant change.
The percentage of adults who can be classified as born again Christians, based on their belief that they will experience eternal salvation based on their commitment to Jesus Christ, personal confession of sins, and acceptance of Christ as their savior, has risen by five percentage points. In 1991, the national estimate was 35% of adults met those criteria. Currently, 40% of adults can be classified as born again.
When asked to choose one of several descriptions of God, the proportion who believe that God is “the all-knowing, all-powerful and perfect Creator of the universe who still rules the world today” currently stands at two-thirds of the public (67%). That represents a seven point drop from the 1991 level.
The biggest shift has been in people’s perceptions of the Bible. In 1991, 46% of adults strongly affirmed that “the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches.” That has slumped to just 38% who offer the same affirmation today.
Among the religious beliefs that have remained relatively constant over the past 20 years were the percentage of adults who describe themselves as Christian (84%); those who say their religious faith is very important in their life today (56%); those who have made a “personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in my life today” (65%); the proportion who agree that Satan is not a living entity but merely a symbol of evil (56%); those who strongly believe that they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs with others who believe differently (25%).
George Barna commented on the significance of these trends on his blog site, www.georgebarna.com, and indicated that over the next eight days he will release five additional summaries of how the fourteen factors tracked since 1991 have shifted among regions, generations, genders, ethnicities, and religious segments. He will also continue to provide commentary after each release on his blog site.
These Updates come shortly after the release of Barna’s newest book, Futurecast, which examines national trends in a wide array of areas including family, lifestyles, entertainment, technology, values, attitudes, demographics, and media consumption, in addition to religious beliefs and behaviors.
To read additional commentary about these trends, and to leave your own thoughts, go to www.georgebarna.com
The data from which the trends are drawn is based on the annual OmniPollSM survey conducted by The Barna Group each January of 1,000 or more adults. The 1991 survey included 1,005 adults randomly selected from across the United States. The comparable 2011 survey included 1,621 randomly chosen adults. Although the Barna Group has been conducting such research since 1984, it was not until 1991 that many of the core tracking questions used by the company were developed and then followed annually.
About Barna Group
Barna Group (which includes its research division, the Barna Research Group) is a private, non-partisan, for-profit organization under the umbrella of the Issachar Companies. It conducts primary research, produces media resources pertaining to spiritual development, and facilitates the healthy spiritual growth of leaders, children, families and Christian ministries.
Located in Ventura, California, Barna Group has been conducting and analyzing primary research to understand cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors since 1984. If you would like to receive free e-mail notification of the release of each new, bi-monthly update on the latest research findings from the Barna Group, you may subscribe to this free service at the Barna website (www.barna.org). Additional research-based resources are also available through this website.
© Barna Group, 2011.
Are You a Responsive Person?
Here are four actions you need to take to make sure your expectations and those you deal with are calibrated.
Define how responsive you are going to be. Segment your contacts. Who is your inner circle? What about the next level out? What about acquaintances? What about complete strangers? I have a different standard for each. I don’t think I need to tell them; I just operate by these standards.
Determine how responsive others need you to be. If you acquire a new client, a boss, or a business partner, ask them to clarify their expectations. How quickly do they need you to respond? Does it need to beimmediate? within a few hours? within 24 hours? in a couple of days? Ask them to be specific. This is an implicit contract.
Express how responsive you want others to be. Take the initiative to clarify this with your direct reports, business associates, and vendors. It will result in less frustration for both of you. It also provides the necessary accountability to make progress on your various projects.
Be proactive when you can’t respond in a timely manner. If the other person has to follow-up, it’s a good sign your expectations are mismatched or you dropped the ball. Instead of waiting for them to ask again, contact them. For example, “I just wanted to acknowledge that I received your email. I am traveling this week, so it will likely be the end of the week before I can respond.”
Remember: You don’t have to provide the same level of responsiveness to everyone—nor can you. But you would be wise to clarify your expectations and then be intentional about it.
Define how responsive you are going to be. Segment your contacts. Who is your inner circle? What about the next level out? What about acquaintances? What about complete strangers? I have a different standard for each. I don’t think I need to tell them; I just operate by these standards.
Determine how responsive others need you to be. If you acquire a new client, a boss, or a business partner, ask them to clarify their expectations. How quickly do they need you to respond? Does it need to beimmediate? within a few hours? within 24 hours? in a couple of days? Ask them to be specific. This is an implicit contract.
Express how responsive you want others to be. Take the initiative to clarify this with your direct reports, business associates, and vendors. It will result in less frustration for both of you. It also provides the necessary accountability to make progress on your various projects.
Be proactive when you can’t respond in a timely manner. If the other person has to follow-up, it’s a good sign your expectations are mismatched or you dropped the ball. Instead of waiting for them to ask again, contact them. For example, “I just wanted to acknowledge that I received your email. I am traveling this week, so it will likely be the end of the week before I can respond.”
Remember: You don’t have to provide the same level of responsiveness to everyone—nor can you. But you would be wise to clarify your expectations and then be intentional about it.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Ed Young: From Abstract Vision to Concrete Reality [ARTICLE REPRINT]
Vision. It’s a buzzword in leadership. It's the "what if?" question that drives us to create and communicate. The challenge is molding that buzzword into reality.
Cast. Cast. Cast.
No matter how effective you are as a leader, people will have a tendency to forget the vision over time. So your job is to remind them of it, continually. How? Cast. Cast. Cast.
In other words: Say it, spray it, wheel it, deal it, and make them feel it. But do not give them the opportunity to forget it.
Kill the Sacred Cow.
Few things can derail vision faster than the mentality of doing something simply because “that’s the way it’s always been done.” Change is ok. In fact, it’s vital. That doesn’t mean you change the vision. But you can change the way the vision is carried out.
Regularly look at what your organization does - events, departments, programs, and even staff members. If something begins to drag people away from the vision God has given you, don’t be afraid to cut it.
Keep It Simple.
For some reason, complexity is mistaken for being “deep.” But truly, complexity is just muddiness. The most powerful message in the world, the Gospel, is incredibly simple and simply incredible. To keep the vision clear and out front:
Keep…It…Simple.
A God-given vision doesn’t need fluff added to it. Make sure you communicate in clear language what God has shown you. And you'll find yourself and your organization moving from "What if?" to "What is."
Cast. Cast. Cast.
No matter how effective you are as a leader, people will have a tendency to forget the vision over time. So your job is to remind them of it, continually. How? Cast. Cast. Cast.
In other words: Say it, spray it, wheel it, deal it, and make them feel it. But do not give them the opportunity to forget it.
Kill the Sacred Cow.
Few things can derail vision faster than the mentality of doing something simply because “that’s the way it’s always been done.” Change is ok. In fact, it’s vital. That doesn’t mean you change the vision. But you can change the way the vision is carried out.
Regularly look at what your organization does - events, departments, programs, and even staff members. If something begins to drag people away from the vision God has given you, don’t be afraid to cut it.
Keep It Simple.
For some reason, complexity is mistaken for being “deep.” But truly, complexity is just muddiness. The most powerful message in the world, the Gospel, is incredibly simple and simply incredible. To keep the vision clear and out front:
Keep…It…Simple.
A God-given vision doesn’t need fluff added to it. Make sure you communicate in clear language what God has shown you. And you'll find yourself and your organization moving from "What if?" to "What is."
Monday, July 25, 2011
Building Your Church or Building His Kingdom
I believe every pastor should ponder the thoughts in this video. I've personally experienced negative comments and withdrawal from those who wanted to see me fail in the ministry rather than succeed. Thank God that greater is He that is in us than He that is in the world... including negative voices. But what challenged me is the attitude of my own heart that wants justice for what's been done or said, rather than having a heart of forgiveness and gratitude for God's generous mercy to me. How we need to totally forgive.
Are you Feeling Overwhelmed [ARTICLE REPRINT]
Very Practical Advice from Michael Hyatt...
I took the following seven steps:
- I decided I had to make a change. This sounds almost trivial, but it is essential. Evidently, some people like being overwhelmed. They wouldn’t admit this, of course. But they thrive on stress in a perverse way. Perhaps it makes them feel important or indispensable. They may complain about their workload, but they are unwilling to do things differently. Are you ready for a change?
- I identified my three high payoff activities. I asked myself, What is it that only I can do? Where do I add the most value? What is really important as opposed to merely urgent? For me, that is writing, speaking, and networking—in that order. Anything else is a waste of what I have been given. What are your high payoff activities?
- I identified my three biggest productivity sinkholes. This was easy. For me, it is responding to email, booking my own travel, and meeting with acquaintances who want my advice. (As much as I’d like to do this, I am drowning in requests.) I decided I had to eliminate—or at least dramatically reduce—these activities in my life. What are your productivity sinkholes?
- I spent time reviewing the productivity basics. In his book, The 4-Hour Workweek, Tim Ferriss, says that the key to productivity is elimination, automation, and delegation. Some stuff is just no longer worth doing. Other stuff can be put on auto-pilot. Most of the rest can be delegated. Have you made a list of which activities fall into which category?
- I decided to do the math. Unfortunately, I had fallen into a common paradigm: I was thinking that if I could do something I should do it—myself. Balderdash! If you can make $50.00 an hour, is it a good investment for you to do tasks that you can hire done for $12.00 an hour? I don’t think so. This is not only bad math, it is bad stewardship. What do you make an hour? Could you be more financially productive if you delegated?
- I hired a virtual executive assistant. I realized that I wasn’t ready for a full-time one. I wanted to take this one step at a time. Thankfully, there are scores of companies (offshore and domestic) that specialize in providing virtual assistants for as many hours as you need. I did this several years ago, and it was a positive experience. I decided to go with Miles Advisory Group. I am very impressed with their responsiveness. Have you ever considered a VA?
- I am scheduling the important tasks. I know, I know, I teach this stuff. You’d think I would already have this nailed. Well, I did. More or less. But it was a completely different context, namely, CorporateWorld. Now I am having to implement the same thing in a different context. I am now scheduling my important tasks first and forcing my productivity sinkholes into small blocks of time. How much of your calendar this week is dedicated to high payoff activities?
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
The 8 ‘ations’ of Innovation
I recently heard a talk by Pastor Rick Warrenat at a TedX Conference. He challenged everyone in the room with his words, 'All leaders are learners. Never stop learning!'. He then went on to share 8 Questions he constantly asks himself (The 8 'ations' of Innovation) to keep creative thinking going: including Dream Centers, Internet Ministries, Campus Pastor Development for Multiite Churches, Externally Focused Small Groups and Church Mergers. Questions?
1. Termination: What do we first need to stop, before we can have room for new ideas? Sometimes termination is the beginning of innovation.
2. Collaboration: How can we do what we are already doing faster and on a larger scale by incorporating a team?
3. Combination: What great ideas or programs do we already have that we could mix together to make something new?
4. Elimination: What part could we take out to make an idea or process simpler?
5. Reincarnation: What has died that we could resurrect in a new form?
6. Rejuvenation: How could we change the purpose or motivation for what we do to bring new energy and new life to an idea?
7. Illumination: How can we look at this idea in a new light, from a different angle?
8. Fascination: How can we make this idea more appealing and fun?
These are great questions to bring new life to stale thinking. Have you put any of these to work in a creative meeting or planning session? Which ones do you need to ask yourself today?
Is your team wresting with ways to innovate in a ministry area? Don't miss our Upcoming Fall Innovtion Labs
For more information, contact Sherry
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Learning To Say No
If we don’t get better at saying “no,”
- Other peoples’ priorities will take precedence over ours.
- Mere acquaintances—people we barely know!—will crowd out time with family and close friends.
- We will not have the time we need for rest and recovery.
- We will end up frustrated and stressed.
- We won’t be able to say “yes” to the really important things.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Going Deep [ARTICLE REPRINT]
Cultivating people of spiritual depth is a pastor's top priority
Monday, June 27, 2011
Monday, June 27, 2011
Recently I have been drawn to the word deep as a descriptor when I speak of mature Christians. My earliest appreciation for the term came when I read a comment by Richard Foster: "The desperate need today is not for a greater number of intelligent people, or gifted people, but for deep people."
What does it mean to be a deep Christ-follower today when unlimited options, noisy distractions, and a million versions of truth swamp the soul? How is it possible to be a deep person while being swept up in a 50-60 hour work week (if you're working), community and school events, shopping, networking, laundering, family-building … oh, and staying on top of things at church too? Is deep even thinkable for anyone living outside of a monastery? I'm just asking.
Of course we can't even attempt to answer these questions until we explore what deep means. Here's my working definition: Deep people are those whose lives are organized around Jesus, his character, his call to a serving life, and his death on the cross for their sins. The abilities (or giftedness) of deep people may be quite diverse, but each has the power to influence others to follow Jesus, grow in Christ-likeness, and live a life of faithful service. They love the world, mix well with people, but are wary of spiritual entrapments. They are known for their wisdom, their compassion for others, and their perseverance in hard times.
How important is depth?Now, consider this statement: A church's greatest treasure is its deep people. I know recent church emphasis has valued seekers, young people, and people that reflect diversity—all important elements of a healthy church. But absent a core of deep people, a church is in trouble. Deep people do not just happen; they are cultivated. Let's take this thought one step further. Deep people are a treasure greater than a church's preacher; greater than its hottest program; even greater than its worship band. I can hear teeth gnashing.
If the previous paragraph is true, then evaluate the following propositions:
A high percentage of a church's deep people should be lay-people, those whose lives are lived in the marketplace, the school, or the community.
Church leaders should be aware of who their deep people are, just as much as they know where their money is … or isn't.
Church leaders should imagine an approach to ministry that makes the continuous cultivation of deep people (of every age) its highest priority.
Churches should consider assigning this cultivation effort to their lead pastors, noting it as their top responsibility.
What would it mean for a church to accept these propositions? Well, what if—hang with me here—the first paragraph of the lead pastor's job description were to read: "The first priority of the lead pastor is to serve as the chief (spiritual) development officer of the entire congregation. He or she will be held personally accountable by the church board to train a certain number of men and women each year qualified to offer spiritual leadership inside and beyond the church organization."
Two developments have prompted these thoughts. The first is a growing suspicion that many churches are no longer producing many (if any) truly deep people. Something is not working. The Willow Creek Association self-study, called REVEAL, seems to speak to this when it expresses concern for the paucity of mature Christians to be developed by mere involvement in church programs. I've done my own unscientific, anecdotal study. Wherever I go in North America and in other parts of the world, I ask pastors these questions:
How many deep people do you know? This often generates a discussion on what deep people look like (see above) and the quiet admission that the number of them is small.
Any chance we're calling people to an unlivable faith?
If not, do you think your church is producing deep people? (This, all-too-frequently, causes a thoughtful silence and an inventory of discipleship programs that mostly seem to work, but only for a short time.)
Do you personally, as pastor, spend time identifying and mentoring potentially deep people? (This often leads to conversations on how few hours there are in a work week.)
The answers I get to these questions are occasionally encouraging. But most lead me to conclude that a lot of pastors concentrate on what draws crowds (often preaching) but neglect what cultivates deep people (usually mentoring).
But what if most preaching events rarely produce deep people? What if preaching tends rather to inspire, to inform, to provide practical Christian advice—but little more?
These are important functions. But if the premier challenge in ministry leadership is to develop deep people, as described, for example, in Paul's words, "rooted, built up, strengthened in the faith as taught … overflowing with thanksgiving," then we may need to rethink how life-altering ministry is accomplished.
Occasionally, when I talk to pastors about these things, I am reminded that larger churches often have a staff person responsible for "discipleship." This usually means small group programs. These are often very good people.
But sometimes I push back by saying that, if populating the church with increasing numbers of deep people is a church's highest priority, then that priority cannot be delegated to associate staff. It must be led, and led aggressively, I suggest, by the senior leader. Only then will the congregation get the message that this deep-people cultivation stuff is really important. In other words, the lead pastor must be first-cultivator.
What did Jesus do?One day I asked myself: If Jesus read the classifieds on the Christianity Today website and decided to apply for a ministry job, which one would he choose? Lead pastor? Soup kitchen operator? Denominational executive? Custodian? Children's worker?
Apparently most of the hours of Jesus' public ministry were invested in a small number of men and women who, under his mentorship, morphed into deep people and set in motion a movement that continues to this day. No question about it: this mentoring activity was Jesus at his best, his sweet spot.
So, in what capacity did he do it? Like many do it today? Form a circle and fill in the blanks of a Bible study booklet? Hold a series of Tuesday evening meetings and show videos of inspirational speakers? I don't think so.
Jesus cultivated deep people in the traditional way of the rabbis. So how did rabbis go about reshaping peoples' lives? In a way considerably different than ours.
Like most rabbis of his time, Jesus did preach. But it was a very different sort of preaching. Much of it was dialogical: story-telling, questions and answers, argument. It bore little resemblance to the monologues of today's preachers. If someone interrupted my preaching, as they apparently did in Jesus' time, I'd be horrified.
Strangely enough, much of Jesus' preaching would have earned him low grades in today's preaching courses. I mean, how would you grade a preacher who started with a curious crowd of thousands that dwindled to an audience of 12, who themselves were hardly paragons of fidelity?
Yet Jesus seemed unconcerned with empty seats. What he does appear to have cared about is what the 12 were going to be and do. I'm left to assume that Jesus the rabbi was less a preacher and more a cultivator-coach to those disciples he'd chosen. What he did with them and how he did it, I call the genius of the rabbinical contract.
I never used to take Jesus' status as a rabbi seriously. With apologies to my Jewish friends, I thought his role as a rabbi was incidental. Then I took a fresh look at the Lord's life and realized that this status as an itinerant rabbi was crucial to understanding his ministry approach. His mission was to redeem and reframe the lives of those who would extend this mission after he was gone. Rabbis, like parents, always had their eyes on the future. Who would perpetuate their teaching?
It's likely that at the age of 12, Jesus stood out among his peers for his remarkable ability to master the Torah and his aptitude for engaging with people, including those much older than he. Luke says people really liked Jesus.
A speculative question might be raised: Who was Jesus' rabbi when he was young? Who was his teacher?
I've no idea, but don't ignore one special person: his mother. She had to have had a profound influence upon his development. She was clearly one tough and intelligent lady (reread The Magnificat). I'm sure that she read the prophet Isaiah to her son every time she had the chance. You can almost hear her saying, "Son, the proud, the powerful, and the rich are not where it's at. Keep your eye out for the poor, the hungry, and the oppressed. Tell them they're loved." And he did.
If the premier challenge in ministry leadership is to develop deep people then we may need to rethink how lifealtering ministry is accomplished.
At the age of 30 Jesus left his family trade and hit the road as a rabbi-teacher. Itinerant rabbis moved from town to town and conducted seminar-type meetings with local people who usually welcomed them and hoped for a miracle or a revolution. In another time we might have called what Jesus did barnstorming. Each of these roaming rabbis possessed a somewhat unique interpretation of the Torah, and their collections of teachings were known as their "word" (as in "my word will not pass away") or even their "gospel." It was said that a rabbi "received" his teaching from one who'd gone before him.
Most visible in the life of a rabbi were his students or disciples. They were usually a small, carefully vetted group of younger men who followed the teacher. In some cases, disciples got into this rabbinical relationship because their families negotiated with the rabbi in a way not dissimilar to the way a parent might try to get a son or daughter into a top college or university.
The better connected a family was in the social network, the greater a young man's chances of connecting with a highly-regarded rabbi. Paul reflects this arrangement when he supports his claim to be an authentic Jew. "Under Gamaliel, I was thoroughly trained," he says. Today he might have put it this way: "I got my degree from the College of Gamaliel."
We have several descriptions of how things developed between Jesus and his disciples. When Jesus spent time on the boat with Peter and other fishermen, Peter told him, "Depart from me for I am a sinful man" (Luke 5).
Peter simply could not visualize himself as a disciple. Too much of a past, he may have reasoned; too many character defects; too many other ambitions. He seemed to see no way he could be what Jesus' rabbinical contract would require.
Jesus' response-"from this moment you will become a fisher of men"—doubtlessly builds off an extensive earlier conversation. In the end Jesus broke through Peter's resistance and drew him away from his trade and into a life of learning and serving.
In telling us this story, the gospel writers seem to assume that we, the readers, are conversant with the drama of the disciple-picking event. They seem to assume we know that this leaving of the nets was no instant decision, but that it had been discussed, proposed, pondered. And now the thinking became actionable. Peter and the others enter the rabbinical contract.
In the times that followed, Peter's rogue opinions and impulsive behaviors appear to vindicate his original opinion of himself. He was no "rock" in those early days, and most of us—had we been the rabbi—would probably have offloaded him at the first opportunity.
Jesus' further choice to call both Matthew (tax collector) and Simon (of the Zealot movement) is stunning when you think about it. The two men could easily have killed each other! Their political positions were as different as those of Bill Maher and Rush Limbaugh.
The 12 Jesus picked were diverse in their personalities, backgrounds, and expectations. Few of us would dare to put these people in the same room together, much less anticipate depth from them.
How do you deepen a disciple?So how did Jesus deepen these men? Three answers: emulation, information, and examination.
Emulation: The disciples of a rabbi sought to mimic everything about their mentor. What did he think? How did he talk? How did he eat? Disciples desired to be flawless copies of their rabbi. They believed that the rabbi was the incarnation of the Torah, and they, in turn, wished for others to see the example of the rabbi in them. Now we can understand Paul when he says: "I want to know Christ … even in his death." To know was to be like.
Information: The rabbi might teach in the Temple area, but, often, rabbis taught away from a classroom and out on the roads, the fields, the marketplace, the lake shore. Everything in ordinary life became an illustration of the rabbi's teaching; most everything was taught in story form or in riddles and proverbs designed to make a point and challenge the disciple's mind. Rabbis were unafraid to leave conclusions up in the air. Even Jesus tells stories with no obvious application. It's as if he likes to say, "Go figure!"
Examination: Rabbis provided times of testing. Think of Jesus' ministry: the storm, feeding the 5000, the betrayal in the garden. Times of testing. You can hear Jesus, saying "Where is your faith?" when the storm is quieted. "You give them something to eat," he demands pointing to the crowd. "You're all going to forsake me," he predicts. There were also rebukes: "Get behind me, Satan." And questions: "What were you discussing when I wasn't there?" And assignments: "He sent them to preach the kingdom of God …"
When the rabbi decided that the contract had been fulfilled, he discharged his disciples. Again, Jesus: "You're servants no longer; you're friends." "It's best for you that I go away." "You're going to do more than I've done." "Love one another as you've been loved." "Get out into the world and replicate yourselves by teaching what I've taught you."
After saying these things, he left them. His teaching now burned into their heads, his spirit now resident in their hearts. Finally, they were on their way to becoming deep people.
You've got to admit it when you review the story: Jesus was an incredible producer of deep people. In three years he made 12 champions. Well, 11 anyway.
How do we do what Jesus did?So what might we learn from all of this?
1. By knowing our "main thing." Is our goal simply to attract a crowd? Or to develop deep people who will carry on Jesus' cause? Developing deep people may not produce instant crowds, but it lays the foundation for a strong and enduring ministry.
2. By not delegating this away. Developing deep people has to be spearheaded by the number one person in the organization. Ask yourself—and this is sort of silly—if Jesus could have accomplished what he came to do if he had turned to John the Baptizer and said, "I'd like to make you my discipleship director. You teach the people what I think is important while I address the larger crowds, cast the vision, raise the money, and network the influencers in the Temple."
3. By helping our churches see that the continuous development of deep people is among the church's most serious investments, and that pastors are held accountable for their work in pursuing this mandate.
4. By following the strategy of emulation, information and examination. Admittedly, this takes time, and it probably means that a lead pastor might have to say to the church board, "I'm going to invest 20 percent of my time in 12-15 people each year, and you're going to have to support me when the congregation begins to ask why I'm not around for a lot of program events."
The strategy of the rabbinical contract probably requires time away from church property, being out of the view of the larger congregation. The pastor's home might be a good place to start. The would-be disciples' workplaces could be another. Any venue where growth can be taught, illustrated, and tested is a useful place.
A fifth thought. Rabbis are not necessarily nice guys. They constantly raise the bar on their disciples. They are not reluctant to open up their own lives; they know how to poke into the inner space of their disciples; they know how to bring out the best in others. Cultivating deep people is serious business.
Paul is thinking about the rabbinical contract when he writes to Timothy. "What I've taught you … teach others … who will teach others." Do it by being an example, Paul says, "in speech (what and how you say things), in life (the way you live), love (your quality of relationships), faith (how you trust God), and purity (your moral choices)." That's all rabbinical talk. "Command, rebuke, exhort?" Also rabbinical. In short: Timothy's assignment was to grow deep people.
Here's a final thought. We're developing disciples of Jesus not of ourselves. The rabbi's deep people are not his. Disciples are not to be owned, controlled, or misused. They belong to Jesus, and he is free to guide them toward life and leadership in the church but also, possibly, beyond it. The church's greatest treasure—these deep people—must be shared, exported, sent out.
When Jesus prayed before his arrest in the garden, what did he pray for? He prayed for "those whom you gave me." Hear him: "I have revealed you to them … I have given them your word … they need your protection … they need to be sanctified … I've sent them out."
He prayed not for the crowds he'd preached to, but for the disciples he'd cultivated.
I have known a "rabbi" or two in my life who guided me through the process of emulation, instruction, and examination. Sometimes they were tough, sometimes tender. They believed in the present and future me. They saw what I might become and endeavored to deepen me. They are all gone now. I miss them greatly. But I have their "word," and I'm committed to handing their gospel on to others.
Gordon MacDonald is editor at large of Leadership Journal.
Copyright © 2011 by the author or Christianity Today International/Leadership Journal.
Click here for reprint information on Leadership Journal.
Are You Pursuing A Supernatural Ministry [ARTICLE REPRINT]
When you’re alone with the Word of God, you probably have less peace than you’re willing to publicly admit.
You’re fine at church, attending conferences, or spending time with churchgoers. But when you’re studying God’s Word by yourself, a sick feeling creeps into your stomach. How can you reconcile Jesus’ teachings with what you see in the Church?
Start with yourself
Most of us know we can’t say with the Apostle Paul, “Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.” (1 Corinthians 11:1 TNIV) Rather than pursuing the Spirit-filled example we could be, we hide behind churchy statements like, “I’m just a man” or, “I’m not perfect, just forgiven.” That will satisfy most, but you know deep down that you’re not “just” a man or woman. You’re a temple of the Holy Spirit, and the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you.
It’s like buying a racecar and only using it to drive to the market at 30 mph. Not only would you be wasting horsepower, but the guy who built the car would go crazy if he knew what you were doing. Similarly, I wonder how our Creator feels seeing His Spirit-filled temples living so normally. Were you created to sit in an office, have meetings, and answer e-mails all day? You know there’s more to what God has called you to. It’s time to take a step of faith.
Pray for the supernatural
Honestly, a nonbeliever can accomplish a lot of what you’re doing. Pray that God would lead you into tasks that can only be done by the power of the Spirit. Pray for results that can’t be explained humanly. Ask Him to do what only He can do through you. Pray in faith (James 1:6) and stop looking at the men of Scripture as unattainable superheroes. “Elijah was a human being, even as we are.” (James 5:17)
Pursue unexplainable holiness
We don’t need leaders who put themselves on a pedestal and pretend they don’t struggle. Nor do we need leaders who say, “I struggle with sin just like you.” The Church is dying for leaders who admit failure but supernaturally “put to death the misdeeds of the flesh.” (Romans 8:13) They’re looking for “an example in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, and in purity.” (1 Timothy 4:12) Don’t hide behind phrases like, “We all sin.” Use the tremendous power you’ve been given to live a holy life.
Serve diligently
We live in a time when Christian leaders are encouraged to be lazy. I’m constantly told to “take more family time.” In our zeal to protect the family, we may have idolized it. While there are still exceptions and pastors who work too much and ignore family, the pendulum has swung the other way. Now we have students graduating from Bible college and seminary expecting “the going rate” and more “family time.” Many of you know you ought to work more diligently and with greater excellence. Don’t give in to the whining you hear. There’s tremendous peace when we work as fervently as we ought (1 Thessalonians 2:9).
Give dangerously
Don’t be afraid to give extravagantly to those in need. While Christian leaders complain about their salaries, be one who is “content” regardless of a financial situation (Philippians 4:11-12).
Love the needy as much as yourself. See them as Christ and joyfully give. Let’s face it: It’s pretty hard to starve to death in America. Don’t be like many other American churchgoers who are more concerned about their standard of living than anyone else’s. Set the example in loving the less fortunate.
Seek His approval
Some of us are bold while standing in front of a crowd yet act like cowards when talking to individuals. We have enough socially awkward religious leaders who have no idea how to have conversations and develop friendships with nonbelievers—the world needs a new generation of leaders who can “become like the Jews to win the Jews.” (1 Corinthians 9:20)
Maybe your challenge is a lack of boldness when you’re in front of the church. I go through phases when I have an unhealthy desire for crowds, so I’ll often think about God’s presence in the room as I teach. This reminds me to seek His approval rather than others’. It’s amazing how bold we can be when we’re aware of God’s presence. It reminds me of Stephen who, “full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:55) Seeing Jesus gave him courage to stand peacefully as he was stoned to death. We are prone to do amazing things when we acknowledge His presence.
May peace motivate you
My desire is to direct you toward peace. I encourage you to take a leap of faith so you can experience it again. We waste time on things that don’t make sense in light of Scripture and eternity—many of you know it’s time for a change. I pray you have the faith to jump.
Monday, June 27, 2011
Thirteen Ways to Frustrate Your Employees [ARTICLE REPRINT]
This is fortunate for me, because I’ve certainly had more bad bosses than good ones. You probably have, too. These lessons were certainly more painful, but they taught me what not to do, which is just as important as what to do.So, just for fun, I thought I would share these lessons as positives rather than negatives. If your goal is to frustrate—or even exasperate—your employees, here are thirteen ways to do it:
- Don’t be responsive. Let their emails languish in your inbox. Don’t return their voice mails in a timely fashion. Let them wait. Maybe they will solve the problem on their own or simply give up.
- Cancel meetings at the last minute. This is especially effective if they have had to travel to the meeting or do a lot of preparation for the meeting.
- Reprimand them in front of their peers. This is even more dramatic if you can do it in front of their subordinates. Nothing quite says, “I don’t have confidence in you” like public ridicule.
- Change your mind frequently. This works best if you can get everyone excited about moving in a new direction, get them to invest lots of time, energy, and, hopefully, money, and then suddenly change direction. This works best if you don’t explain your rationale. Leave them guessing!
- Don’t bother stating your expectations. Instead, be vague. Go silent. Let them wonder. But then, when it comes time for their annual review, hold them accountable to specific goals. This way, no matter what they accomplished, you can make them feel like a failure.
- Always ask for what they don’t have with them. If they present a summary, say, “Where’s the backup for this? You don’t expect me to make a decision without the detail, do you?” If they present the detail, say, “Do you have a summary? You don’t expect me to wade through all this detail, do you?” Either way, you keep them off balance.
- Focus on superficial things rather than substance. For example, log how much time they actually spend at their desk or in the office rather than what they actually accomplish. Pay attention to their style and the way they dress. This is way more important than the quality of their work. Plus, they either have it or don’t.
- Assign them work, then micromanage the process. Don’t be responsive to their needs (see #1 above), but insist that they keep you informed every step of the way. Second-guess their decisions. Challenge their thinking. Question every expense. Don’t give them much rope. They should spend more time answering your inquiries than actually getting work done.
- Do all the talking. You’re the boss, right? That automatically means you are smarter, funnier, and more experienced. Listening is for sissies. Until they become your boss, they need to listen—and take notes. Most people would die for the chance to be your subordinate.
- Never recognize your people. Take them for granted. After all, you are paying them to work for you. What else could they need? When they do a great job, quickly brush by it and give them a tougher assignment. Keep raising the bar. You don’t want them to get “the big head.”
- Catch them doing something wrong. Be quick to acknowledge their mistakes. If you can do it in public, so much the better. If you do this often enough, you will wear them out. If they are not perpetually discouraged, you are not trying hard enough!
- Communicate that you are the fount of all wisdom. The only valid ideas are your ideas. If you want their opinion, you’ll give it to them. Find ways to explain why their ideas won’t work. You are really doing them a favor by pointing this out—as often as you can.
- Be moody. This is probably the most important tip I can give you. This keeps everyone off-balance. Sometimes, you should be charming. Other times, be angry. But never let them know why. Keep them wondering if it’s them or something else. You want your people asking your assistant for a “weather report” before they meet with you. They should ask, “Is Bill in a good mood today?” You want to keep this unpredictable. This will give them just enough hope to stay in the game but ensure that they stay frustrated and dreading each meeting.
Monday, June 20, 2011
10 Areas that Church Leaders should be concerned about... [ARTICLE REPRINT]
Here is a list that I found that is a good thermometer for staying focused... Church leaders should be concerning if...
- If the pastor does not have adequate time to be in the Word or if he chooses not to do so.
- If the members are spending time arguing about how money should be spent.
- If none or only a few of the key leaders are actively sharing their faith.
- If there is no clear process of discipleship in place, just a plethora of programs and activities.
- If corporate prayer is not a major emphasis in the church.
- If church members are arguing about worship style or worship times.
- If church members expect the paid staff to do most of the ministry, instead of the staff equipping the members to do the work of ministry (“Why didn’t he visit me in the hospital?”)
- If there are ongoing disagreements about matters of the church facilities.
- If the church has more meetings than new disciples.
- If the leadership of the church does not have a coherent plan for what is taught in small groups and Sunday school classes.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
5 right ways to respond to criticism [ARTICLE REPRINT]
Consider the source – In a stakeholder sense, how much influence and investment does this person have in the organization? This might not change your answer but may change the amount of energy you invest in your answer. Our church meets in two schools, for example, so if the Director of Schools has criticism for me, I will invest more time responding than if it’s a random person who never intends to attend our church.
Listen to everyone – You may not respond to everyone the same way, but everyone deserves a voice, and everyone should be treated with respect. This doesn’t necessarily include anonymous criticism. I listen to some if it, especially if it appears valid, because I’ve learned from that too and always wonder if my leadership prompted an anonymous response, but I don’t “criticize” leaders who don’t. I don’t, however, weight it as heavily as I would criticism assigned to a person. (Feel free to leave a comment about anonymous criticism and how you respond.)
Analyze for validity – Is the criticism true? This is where maturity as a leader becomes more important because there is often an element of truth even to criticism you don’t agree with at the time. Don’t dismiss the criticism until you’ve considered what’s true and what isn’t true. Mature leaders are willing to admit fault and recognize areas of needed improvement.
Look for common themes – If you keep receiving the same criticism, perhaps there is a problem even if you still think there isn’t. It may not be a vision problem or a problem with your strategy or programming, but it may be a communication problem. You can usually learn something from criticism if you are willing to look for the trends.
Give an answer - I believe criticism is like asking a question. It deserves an answer even if the answer is that you don’t have an answer. You may even have to agree to disagree with the person offering criticism. By the way, I save answers to common criticism received because I know I’ll be answering that same criticism again.
Listen to everyone – You may not respond to everyone the same way, but everyone deserves a voice, and everyone should be treated with respect. This doesn’t necessarily include anonymous criticism. I listen to some if it, especially if it appears valid, because I’ve learned from that too and always wonder if my leadership prompted an anonymous response, but I don’t “criticize” leaders who don’t. I don’t, however, weight it as heavily as I would criticism assigned to a person. (Feel free to leave a comment about anonymous criticism and how you respond.)
Analyze for validity – Is the criticism true? This is where maturity as a leader becomes more important because there is often an element of truth even to criticism you don’t agree with at the time. Don’t dismiss the criticism until you’ve considered what’s true and what isn’t true. Mature leaders are willing to admit fault and recognize areas of needed improvement.
Look for common themes – If you keep receiving the same criticism, perhaps there is a problem even if you still think there isn’t. It may not be a vision problem or a problem with your strategy or programming, but it may be a communication problem. You can usually learn something from criticism if you are willing to look for the trends.
Give an answer - I believe criticism is like asking a question. It deserves an answer even if the answer is that you don’t have an answer. You may even have to agree to disagree with the person offering criticism. By the way, I save answers to common criticism received because I know I’ll be answering that same criticism again.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Glorious Failure
My most memorable lessons have come not through success, but through glorious failures...
What constitutes a Glorious Failure?
A Glorious Failure honors God even when it isn’t seen by others as “successful.” Perhaps you are reaching a hard to reach group or area. Perhaps it never becomes a part of self sustaining or self governing and whatever the other self thing is, but it tries to honor God anyway.
A Glorious Failure is when you work hard, give it all you got and try some new things that no one else is doing……..and it falls flat. Now if you learn, adapt and refine what you have learned for the next time you time, great. That was a glorious failure. If you keep on doing those things even when they repeatedly fail, well, that is insanity.
Glorious Failures help us unearth and surface terrible ideas that can be discarded.
Glorious Failures help us try new leadership skills and ideas that may not work with one team but later can be adapted with another.
Glorious Failures sift us as leaders and help shape our hearts for the future…IF we let them.
So – What are your Glorious Failures? What are you learning from them?
What constitutes a Glorious Failure?
A Glorious Failure honors God even when it isn’t seen by others as “successful.” Perhaps you are reaching a hard to reach group or area. Perhaps it never becomes a part of self sustaining or self governing and whatever the other self thing is, but it tries to honor God anyway.
A Glorious Failure is when you work hard, give it all you got and try some new things that no one else is doing……..and it falls flat. Now if you learn, adapt and refine what you have learned for the next time you time, great. That was a glorious failure. If you keep on doing those things even when they repeatedly fail, well, that is insanity.
Glorious Failures help us unearth and surface terrible ideas that can be discarded.
Glorious Failures help us try new leadership skills and ideas that may not work with one team but later can be adapted with another.
Glorious Failures sift us as leaders and help shape our hearts for the future…IF we let them.
So – What are your Glorious Failures? What are you learning from them?
Friday, June 3, 2011
6 Ways Leaders Can Build Trust [Article Reprint]
Here are six ways that a leader can instill respect and trust in his team:
With trust a team can work together. Individuals will accept roles. Leaders will be respected. Teams can be productive.
- Expose yourself. Open yourself to others. Not in a dangerous way where people can take advantage of you, but rather in a way that demonstrates honesty and humility. Your team needs to know that you are just like them. Be willing to admit your own failures. If you put up a wall around yourself, your team will too.
- Take the hit. When undesirable outcomes happen, we are all quick to point the finger. If your team members see that you are willing to take the blame for the good of the team, even if its not directly your fault, then they will start to let go and trust you. As leader of a team you need to accept the responsibility for both the good and the bad.
- Build your team members up. This is the opposite of taking the hit. Whenever it is appropriate make sure you praise your team members in front of their peers and superiors. Be sure to applaud their efforts and results. Never try to take sole credit for something good that the team did.
- Get rid of the leash. Allow for freedom to explore new ideas and to be creative. If people feel that you are micro-managing them, they will stop trusting you. Make room for failure and more importantly the opportunity to learn from failure.
- Accept confrontation. Fighting is not good, but neither is false agreement. When there is a difference of opinion, promote discussion. Explore solutions with the intent to solve problems. If disagreement never occurs, then your team is afraid of telling you the truth.
- Find the value in each person. We all have weaknesses, but we also have strengths. Everyone brings something different to the table. Find what is unique in each individual and use that unique strength for the good of the team.
With trust a team can work together. Individuals will accept roles. Leaders will be respected. Teams can be productive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
