But more suprisingly...  so will Robert A. Schuller and his wife, Donna (who left after a family feud in 2008) and Schuller's daughter, Jeanne Schuller Dunn (who lives in Hawaii).

No more church payroll checks for the daughter that lives in Hawaii?  Wow, that's radical.

Also announced:  Other Cathedral employees, depending on their salaries, will also face a pay cut of between 5-10%.

According to the OC register story, the CC has seen more than a 30% drop in revenues; been selling properties like crazy to make up a $55 to $70 million budget deficit; and has laid off at least 100 employees over the 'last year or so'.

OBSERVATIONS: 

Watch this one.  What happens when a once financially viable ministry like the CC hits hard times like this?  Once you start selling assets to cover multi-million dollar shortages, it becomes a game of monopoly.  We all know what usually happens when you have to start cashing in your hotels.  Are there other large ministries that will see the same fate in the future?  Promise Keepers and Focus on the Family are a couple that come to mind... but what happens when its an actual church that fails.  (And yes, this case can prove that no church can be 'too big to fail')

Does your church have anyone on the regular payroll that isn't local?  Or as an extreme, is the founding pastor's daughter that lives across the ocean?  (Could be that she contributes some kind of signifant work from Hawaii though).  If so, how do you lay off a hundred employees with good conscience?

I don't wish for the demise of the CC.  But the truth is, their support base is dying (literally).  The day of big money from that segment is quickly coming to an end.  That's a tough position to be in, but not unlike thousands of churches here in the US that are just on a much smaller scale.

Is it ok for a church to die this kind of slow, agonizing death?

What would you do to revitalize or turn around a place like the Crystal Cathedral?  Is there really anything that CAN be done?

Todd

Here's some of what he writes:

We were the gullible ones. When they said, "The Lord promises you untold wealth if you will simply give a thousand dollars right now," we went to the phones and put the donations on our credit cards. God forgive us.

We were the undiscerning ones. When they said, "I need your sacrificial gift today so I can repair my private jet," we didn't ask why a servant of God wasn't humble enough to fly coach class to a Third World nation. God forgive us.

We were the foolish ones. When it was revealed that they were living in immorality, mistreating their wives or populating cities with illegitimate children, we listened to their spin doctors instead of demanding that ministry leaders act like Christians. God forgive us.

We were the naïve ones. When they begged for $2 million more in donations because of a budget shortfall, we didn't feel comfortable asking why they needed that $10,000-a-night hotel suite. In fact, if we did question it, another Christian was quick to say, "Don't criticize! The Bible says, ‘Touch not the Lord's anointed!'" God forgive us.

We have treated these charlatans like Al Capone—as if they were untouchable—and as a result their corruption has spread throughout charismatic churches like a plague. Our movement is eaten up with materialism, pride, deception and sexual sin because we were afraid to call these Bozos what they really are—insecure, selfish, egotistical and emotionally dysfunctional.

If we had applied biblical discernment a long time ago we could have avoided this mess. There is no way we can know how many unbelievers rejected the gospel because they saw the church supporting quacks who swaggered, bragged, lied, flattered, bribed, stole and tearfully begged their way into our lives—while we applauded them and sent them money.

Without naming names, he calls individuals out.  Still, that's quite a bold step... calling leaders in your own circle 'deceptive and manipulating' and 'false prophets' is testicular enough... he takes it one step further when he lays blame with the people that gave them all the money and the power.  Knowing, all the while, that many of his publication's readers were probably the very ones who sent the checks.  That's uber-testicular, my friend.  He says:

If we had applied biblical discernment a long time ago we could have avoided this mess.

Youch.

But true.

All circles have their more excentric preachers and high rollers.  This isn't just a charismatic issue to be sure.  But I'm glad when someone says enough is enough.

The only criticism I have in Grady's piece is that I don't see any of these people he's talking about going anywhere, just yet.  But I think the tide is turning.  Quickly.  Soon and very soon, the $2 million deficit will not be replentished.

What are your thoughts?

Todd

And they've been doing this for the past four years.

After a lawsuit against the church was struck down because of free speech rights, Tom George, the club's owner, had an idea.  If the church was going to protest his club, why not have his club protest the church?

And that's what they did.

As people arrived for services at New Beginnings Ministries, they were also greeted with strippers from The Fox Hole.

That's right.  The tables were turned.

Score one for the Fox Hole.

Here are my thoughts...

1.  Do I think stripping is an admirable profession?  No.  Owning a strip club?  Double no.

2.  Do I think the church was right in what they did?  No.  Not at all.  Bullhorns yelling down people?  Not cool.  Taking pictures of license plates and posting them on your website?  Way not cool.

3.  Which is more important... that people stop going to strip clubs or that they find Jesus?  Which is more important... that these women stop stripping or that they find Jesus?  The one thing this church has done with their actions is pretty much guarantee that none of them will have anything to do with any of these people coming to Christ.  We can only pray that others will be able to show them the love of Jesus in a more constructive way.

4.  I get really upset when people, under the authority of the church, make the death and resurrection of Jesus into a license to be a jerk.  Matter of fact, I think it's interesting to compare how Jesus treated 'stripper types' compared to how this pastor and church does.  Jesus didn't whip out his bullhorn (hey, it coulda happened) and bully people.  He doesn't try to shame them into loving him either.  And he doesn't get angry.  In fact, he keeps his anger for the Pharisees; the religous people who were always pointing their fingers.

5.  We've got to get past the thinking that non-christians are going to act like Christians.  They won't.  Ever.  Truth be told:  if we were really all that serious, we'd have plenty of work just making sure that Christians acted like Christians.

6.  It's so easy for some people to get so wrapped up in fighting evil that they lose any chance they ever had at stopping the evil they're fighting against.  (Read that one twice)

Should Christians stand against evil and sin?  Of course.  I'm just not sure this is the way to do it.

So... if you're asking me which side I'm taking on this one... I'm more prone to side with the strippers.  They simply turned the tables on the church that has been bullying them for the past four years. 

What's your take?

I'd love to hear it.

Todd

PS -- I'm resisting all the temptation to say the obvious jokes (that church attendance is up 25% since the strippers showed up, or that the church's offering is now mysteriously missing all the $1 bills).  That just wouldn't be cool.

THE American clergy is suffering from burnout, several new studies show. And part of the problem, as researchers have observed, is that pastors work too much. Many of them need vacations, it’s true. But there’s a more fundamental problem that no amount of rest and relaxation can help solve: congregational pressure to forsake one’s highest calling.

The pastoral vocation is to help people grow spiritually, resist their lowest impulses and adopt higher, more compassionate ways. But churchgoers increasingly want pastors to soothe and entertain them. It’s apparent in the theater-style seating and giant projection screens in churches and in mission trips that involve more sightseeing than listening to the local people.

As a result, pastors are constantly forced to choose, as they work through congregants’ daily wish lists in their e-mail and voice mail, between paths of personal integrity and those that portend greater job security. As religion becomes a consumer experience, the clergy become more unhappy and unhealthy.

MacDonald then goes on to describe what he considers 'consumer-driven religion' as something that has completely rewritten the job description of many pastors.  He says:  "They’re no longer expected to offer moral counsel in pastoral care sessions or to deliver sermons that make the comfortable uneasy. Church leaders who continue such ministerial traditions pay dearly."

I clearly don't run in the United Church of Christ circles, abut I find MacDonald's assessment of the 'consumer-driven' church to be a little off-base.

If anything, I don't find these trends to be 'consumer-driven' but rather 'pastor-driven'.

Starting back with the old Willow "seeker sensitive' style of worship service, emphasis shifted to make the worship experience more palatable, not necessarily for the believer, but for the unbeliever.  Music, message topics... literally everything was turned upside down in order to reach a target audience.  Some still argue that that in the rush to be more relevant, the gospel was watered down.  Of course, Willow has since changed its strategy because of a number of reasons.  (and we could debate the whole SS movement all day long).  But my point:  this wasn't consumer driven. It was pastor-driven.

In fact, many of the church's that I have the opportunity to work with that are really kickin' it are FAR from consumer driven.  They are staff and lead pastor driven.  Services are crafted, not by what Jill or Jane in the pew wants to hear; but rather by what the leadership feels will make the greatest impact on their lives; and what will communicate the gospel in the most powerful and dramatic way.

The pastors of these types of churches, while they have the contemporary (whatever that means) music and flashing lights, do NOT want to lull people with what they want to hear, or to soothe or entertain anyone.  Not by any means.

MacDonald bases his feelings on an experience that happened to him.  The advisory committee of his small congregation in Massachusetts toldhim  to keep my sermons to 10 minutes, tell funny stories and leave people feeling great about themselves. The unspoken message in such instructions is clear: give us the comforting, amusing fare we want or we’ll get our spiritual leadership from someone else.

This may be the norm in his circle of churches, but it's just not something I hear happening often in the churches I'm familiar with.

In fact, I find most church members to be rather apathetic and complacent.  Unless the sermons are REALLY bad or REALLY long, they don't make much of a fuss on worship content.  They will make a fuss over other miniscule things that allow them power though:  things like finances and facilities.

I'll be the first to admit... I've seen a few congregations that have gone wild.  But in each and every case I know, it's been because of the pastors or leadership, rather than the congregation.

You can read all of MacDonald's op-ed here. 

What do you think?  Are the trends in today's church consumer-driven or pastor-driven?  I'd love to hear your thoughts...

Todd

I think much of what your staff thinks about you (personally) and your church (corporately), they'll learn in the first few months.  It's important for the senior leader to set the tone and make a great first impression.  In fact, if you don't get off to a great start in the first few months, the chances of having a well-rounded, long-term staff member are reduced significantly.  They'll simply find another place to serve after a couple of years.  It happens all the time.

But how do you start off a good relationship with a new employee?  What if you send something like this to your new staff member.  In this case, we'll call him Bob.

Dear Bob,

I am so glad to have you here with us on staff.  I know that you and your family will be a great addition to our team here at [your church name].  On your first day, I wanted to share a few things that may help you feel a little more at home with us as a church, and with me, personally:

1.  My most important priority is your happiness and ministry here at the church. If there’s anything I can do to make you happier and more efficient – tell me right away. This isn’t idealism, it’s good ministry, because happy and fulfilled people are more productive in their Kingdom work.

2.  I will not burden you with endless rules and regulations. You’re an adult – I trust you to use your best judgment. 

3.  You have my full permission to screw up, as long as you own up to it, apologize to those affected and learn from it.

4.  Please tell me when I screw up so I can apologize and learn from it.

5.  Please make sure to hunt down people who do great work and praise them for it. I will do this as much as humanly possible, but I can’t do it alone.

6.  If I get it right occasionally, I’d love to hear about it from you, too :o)

7.  I will always have time for you. My calendar will never be so full that my next free time to talk to you is three weeks from next Friday.

8.  I want to know about you as an employee AND as a human being. I DO care about your private life, about you and your family’s health and well-being.

9.  Life is more than work. If you’re regularly working overtime, you’re just making yourself less happy and more stressed. Don’t join the cult of overwork – it’s bad for you and the company.

10.  I expect you to take responsibility for your own well-being at work. If you can do something today to make yourself, a co-worker or me a little happier at work – do it!

I'm looking forward to getting to know you and your family, and to you having many fruitful years of ministry here with us.  Welcome!

[Your name]

If you sent this letter to a new employee, and actually held to it, would it make a difference?  I think it would.

I've seen many a church that didn't value their employees.  This letter sets the standard that people on staff are valued.  It gives permission to fail.  It expects that the staff person will lead.  And it perfectly balances work and family as well as employee and team player.

A few of questions for you today...

1.  What do you think of the letter?  Could you honestly send this to your new employees?  Does your church practice what this letter preaches?

2.  Would this letter have made a difference in your employment if you had received it? 

3.  What would you add or take away from this letter?

4.  Is this type of thing a great or horrible idea?

I'd love hear your input...

Todd

This post was inspired by Alexander Kjerulf's Chief Happiness Officer Blog, who revised it from Michael Wade’s post over at ExecuPundit called Note from boss to employees.

Too many preachers fail to ask themselves what every successful fisherman asks. They fail to ask what bait will hook their listeners. Preachers may think that because their seminary training only needed an open Bible and syllabus notes to learn effectively that the same should be true for their learners, as well.

This line of thinking assumes that what was good enough for the preacher's training in discipleship should be sufficient for everyone else. "My Bible teachers didn't cater to me, and I learned the material presented just fine," the preacher may think. This thinking assumes more motivation than is typically true for many who are listening to a sermon.

The learner is more motivated to engage the sermon's subject when it addresses life crises the learner is experiencing. These crises may be obvious, such as an impending divorce or the death of a friend. Other life crises are less dramatic to the outside observer but equally intense for the person experiencing them. Examples include relational conflict with an employee, worry about a child's schooling or the security of the world post-September 11. The learner is highly motivated to engage the proposition proposed when the preacher speaks to the concerns that are on the hearts of the hearers and does so from a theological perspective. These same preachers actively look for opportunities to address problems as they surface in the text...

I've heard many a preacher that automatically thought that everyone in the room was interested in what they were saying when looking around the room anyone could tell that nothing could be further from the truth.

Do you automatically take for granted that people will love your topic, your theme, your illustrations, your 45 minutes of babbling?  If so, maybe you should read more of Rod's article and think things through again.

Don't get me wrong, I've also heard many great sermons... engaging, inspiring, even entertaining.

All I'm saying is that we all like to hear ourselves talk.  Especially preachers (I've found).  Let's make sure that we think through our audience, their needs, and how to best present our story (the Gospel).  If and when we do, it is only GOOD for the outcome.

What do you think?  How often do you think of your intended audience as you're preparing your weekly message?

I'd love to hear your comments...

Todd

You know the bad news.

The recession is taking a toll on religious groups, with giving down and layoffs extending from denominational headquarters to local churches.

Now comes the worse news.

Even after the economy recovers, it is unlikely that church budgets will quickly rebound to pre-recession levels.

Sylvia Ronsvalle of empty tomb inc., a Champaign, Ill., organization that researches religious giving, has long been sounding an alarm about a downward trend in Protestant giving in recent decades. Per-member giving declined from 3.1 percent of income in 1968 to 2.6 percent in 2007, even before the latest economic downturn.

There is not a “creeping crisis” of relevancy in American Christianity, she said.

“It is a galloping crisis, and it’s immune to the economy,” Ronsvalle said. “The church needs to dig in and figure it out.”

What do YOU think?

Many of the churches I work with really aren't seeing much of a giving crisis.  Granted, most of those churches have great vision and leadership... are actually growing... and are doing quite well, even during these tough economic times.

But I think this may be the exception to the rule.

If a church doesn't have a clear plan... a clear vision... and strong leadership, I'm guessing that they may be getting hit very hard.

And there are some parts of the country, regionally, that are getting hit harder than others.

Now that said, I think most churches, even the ones that are doing well, are a little shell-shocked.  They are being more prudent with expenditures and are watching things closely.  But overall, their giving is steady or increasing slightly.

How's your church doing during this financial climate?  Is giving way down, holding steady, or up slightly?

And what impact does vision and leadership have in how churches do financially during the tough times?

I'd love to hear your thoughts and comments...

Todd

One of Leadership Network's newest book is titled Baby Boomers and Beyond, and it explores the opportunities and challenges that the older adult population presents for the Christian community. Author Amy Hanson dares church leaders to let go of stereotypes about aging and embrace a new paradigm, that older adults are for the most part active, healthy, and capable of making significant contributions for the Kingdom of God.

Hanson offers a realistic view of the boomers and reveals what matters most to this age group: staying young, juggling multiple relationships, and redefining retirement. By tapping into their needs, pastors can engage this burgeoning group and unleash the power of the boomer generation to enhance and strengthen the mission of the church.

The book digs into the questions that arise when working with this growing population. How do we let go of "one-size-fits-all" ministry? What spiritual growth can we encourage? How do we meld multiple generations? And, most important, how do we harness the potential of this new generation? These are important considerations for those who want to be serious about ministering with aging boomers.

Baby Boomers and Beyond contains numerous illustrative examples from churches and baby boomers across the country and offers church leaders best practices to put in motion.

Learn more about the author at her website www.amyhanson.org

At the center of the issue was a post about Benny Hinn and Paula White. I simply gave some personal thoughts on the issue that had recently hit the tabloids (and some mainstream news outlets as well).

I was immediately greeted with comments about how terrible it was that I would even mention the subject (sinced both Hinn and White had denied its truthfulness); and how I shouldn't write anything negative about people. (Oh, I was also accused of slander, and of name dropping for the sole purpose of increasing twitter and blog numbers).

That leads me to a couple thoughts this morning; both about MMI and about how we communicate in our Christian 'church worker' subculture.

MMI has always been a personal blog for me. It's a place that I share my personal thoughts... things I like, my pet peeves, and most importantly, a place that I can share things that interest me. That could be anything from something on leadership; to something on technology; to something on church trends or leadership. All of those things interest me.

Communication and relationships are also something I have a lot of interest in. Serving on a church staff for nearly twenty years taught me that working at a church was probably the toughest job I ever had. The good and bad relationships, the politics, and the positive momentum and personal scandals make church work the most interesting, difficult, and at times, rewarding work in the world.

That's why I'm drawn to the positive, leadership-enhancing resources that I share. I love a good article or post that challenges me to be a better leader. That's why posts like 7 Questions that will lead to a stronger partnership between you and your senior pastor, or Is your church an equipping church or a non-equipping church? catch my interest (as they did this week). They allow me to become a better leader and learn from other's experience; and even their mistakes. My thought in sharing these types of resources is that if they can help me, they may be able to help someone else.

To be honest, that's probably why I'm drawn to the negative, shake-your-head, or typical church scandal type article as well. In my church staff employment, I saw many things that made me sad, angry, and simply want to give up. I've lived through the scandal of a watching a good friend in ministry disqualify himself from ministry right under my nose. I've dealt with churches that don't know how to deal with conflict and take a bad situation and screw it up even more. It happens over and over, everyday, in churches all across America. When I read an article on a church conflict, or scandal, or something that makes me shake my head, I seriously look to see what I can learn from that. That's why stories like Benny's or Ted's interest me. When I see a leader with negative traits, or someone who finds himself in a conflict that instigates a public press story, I am interested because I want to learn what has happened... if for no other reason that so that it doesn't happen to me. I think this type of analysis, at least for me, is very helpful.

I also enjoy watching trends in the church and culture. When a foundation donates $400K for Episcopal gay liturgies, I think that's something I should know about. Not because things like this infuriate me or stir emotions, but because it's part of the church world and the culture in which I live. Call it 'shop talk' or whatever you like. For some reason, I'm interested in comparing my property tax bill to Joel Osteen's. I think as church workers, we have at least a working knowledge of things like the house church movement or church planting. It's part of our 'trade'. We need to be knowledgeable.

Other stories... I just find interesting. Like why Ed Young, Jr. would make this video. Or about the church that claims it invented the vuvuzela.

Some people think that only positive stuff should be highlighted... that anything negative or personal should be avoided in the church world. I disagree. I think there has to be a proper balance. While I've not always acheived the balance I'd like here at MMI, I think overall, it features a good balance of the 'good', the 'bad', and the 'ugly'.

Whenever I've written a post like the Benny one, some people accuse MMI of being sensationalistic. In fact, a friend once described MMI as one half Bible, and one half National Enquirer. To be honest, that doesn't bother me. In fact, you only have to open your Bible to the old testament to find stories that they couldn't print in the National Enquirer!

So... as you read MMI, remember... you're reading my personal blog, not the New York Times (or Christianity Today for that matter). You are reading a compilation of things that interest me. In fact, that's always been my standard for what I write about and link to here. I'm silly enough to figure that if I find something interesting, that maybe someone else will as well.

And, above all, I hope you find the links, articles, and posts to be helpful, in some way at some time, to your local ministry. That, at least, is my prayer!

Have a great week!