I read the article on the church being externally focused.  I have been working on some tools to help our people introduce others to Christ.  A card or something that they can easily handout without having to say a lot or memorize much.  Some to start conversation about their personal story of coming to Christ.  I would be interested in what others have tried in this particular area of turning the church people into actual witnesses for Christ.

Good article...however, why is it that we are discounting ministry “within” the walls of the church. Why is it that ministry done in the church doesn’t seem to matter to today “up and coming leaders”? And it seems ironic to me that the very measuring stick for growth (numbers) is also the measuring stick that is being critisized.
Is it possible that one of the reason we aren’t seeing more conversions, and more growth, is that we have forgotten what caused the explosion of churches in the past century. The growth in the past century was caused not by community involvement, but by evangelism through Sunday School, Vacation Bible School, “outreach” Sunday’s (where people were invited from outside the church to inside the church). The irony to me is that the churches that have stopped growing, the mainline churches, became liberal and stopped seeing growth because they became social agencies instead of equipping stations, exaltation centers and spiritual health centers. Doctors don’t make house calls very much anymore, why do we think that the community wants us to take religion “back to the streets”? How about we teach the word, worship God, preach the Gospel, and equip the saints for ministry? Funny how the New Testament clearly teaches that the 1st century church was VERY inwardly focused, and how that inward focus of taking care of each other was a STRONG testimony to the community.
Again, this is a fine article to a point, but it is unfortunate that in encouraging churches to be socially conscious, that we have to criticize the primary Biblical call of pastors, teachers and the organization of the church. It is the collective power of the centralized, local organization of believers that has taken the Gospel to the whole world.
I believe the struggles of the American church have more to do with the lack of the prophetic voice, i.e. calling sin, sin...including materialism, etc… and the lack of providing the “average” believer with more opportunities to invite his/her friends to a church that is consistently preaching the Gospel, and calling sinners to repentence - just like they did in the 1st century. Pastors today are afraid to preach the truth. But in doing so, we are leaving out the power of the spoken Gospel.
Sorry to be so negative. But I am worn out from listening to everyone bash the church for things God never called it to. Jesus clearly taught, “the poor will always be with you”. I know I sound heartless for using that scripture, yes I know there is a broader context, but there is overwhelming evidence that God has called the church not to meet every social need in the community, but to be a powerful center for preaching and teaching the TRUTH. We are commanded to take care of the widows, the fatherless, ie. the needy among us, but I challenge anyone to show me a passage of scripture that indicates God has called the church to be another social organization. Caring for the sick and needy in our church is a primary responsibility of the church, meeting social needs in the community is a secondary one - it is a fine program to pursue, and it can be a method for the individual believer to show love to his neighbor, whom he has a relationship with, but it should never become the primary focus of the organized church. That is the path the mainline church took, and it leads down the path to liberalism because ultimately, to be effective in this area, you must partner with governmental organizations and other churches who do not hold to the same priorities, standards and convictions. It also requires enormous amounts of money and time....
I guess that’s enough for now. I’m not saying we shouldn’t be socially consicious...let’s just not confused the need for a balanced church, with a supposed “solution” to church growth through social need meeting.

Thanks for providing this forum…
-brian-

Brian, I have wondered for a long time about just what you are saying - where in the Bible does it talk about the church meeting the needs of the community as a social agency? 

And yet:  why is it that the people in a church that is NOT “externally focused” as this article describes, don’t feel the freedom to invite their neighbors into their church which is preaching “the truth”?  It is because their neighbors aren’t interested if the church which is so sure it is right (the way they perceive our preaching the truth) doesn’t care about the community.  In fact, their neighbors might well be hostile to such a church.  And so the church’s members might enjoy its fellowship, but that church will not effectively reach anyone new for Christ.

We have to remember that the church of the New Testament was a powerless minority, from the world’s perspective, in its time.  We evangelicals in the U.S. are regarded, by the world, as powerful - perhaps too powerful - and only when we show the world our love and humility will we win a hearing for the gospel.  The New Testament does not spell out for us explicity, but rather implicitly, how we must behave in the times we find ourselves in. 

The article describes the problem - few are asking “what must I do to be saved?” How do we behave in our context to raise the question?  Staying in our churches saying we have the truth doesn’t do much.  If those who attend our church take the truth and then act lovingly and with humility toward their neighbors, then that makes a difference - -but isn’t that what the book is talking about?

Brian - your candor and apparent frustration with the “up and comming leaders” in the church is an interesting point. Do you mean those at willow Creek and Saddleback and the like? (Niether or which am I affiliated). Strong, faithful Christian churches that have reached thousands in their own community and more importantly touched the lives of hundreds of thousands more globally by simply following the words of Christ, and his apostles? The principles used by these churches and thousands of others are not some generational new coat of paint. Christ was relevant, He met people’s needs. He did not stay in one temple and put out a sign or have people hand out scrolls saying Jesus preaching again this week - come this Sunday or go to hell. He was always out creating a crowd. Everywhere - even his death created one.  Creating a crowd means gettiing outside of serving your members and having them be servants. “Invite a friend” or “outreach” Sunday is not a form of service - it is something people should be doing everyday because they are excited about where they attend - because the church they attend is real, significant, and is changing lives for Christ.

It is somewhat disturbing to hear that there remains a perspective in the body of Christ that “Well, some of your are going to be miserable...some of you are going to hell. Oh well.” When you explain your interpretation of the “poor are always with you” it seems to have no context in terms of the sermon on the mount and how Christ compells us to live and be.  Or in terms of how the 1st century church opetated - sharing everything in common so that everyone would have something. The first century church was the most outwardly focused body of churches in recorded history. How were people added to their number daily? They moved from house to house, they fellowshiped, (and not just at a potluck hidden in the temple so “members only” could enjoy sister Marylou’s coleslaw), they broke bread together...they were involved in each other’s lives and the lives of those around them.

Lastly - to sgillesp - the early church was NOT a powerless minority. In Paul’s lifetime the gospel had been preach to what was known of the world. The ruling authorities were beyond concerned that the “world was being turned upside down.” This was the fastest growing body of its time. And it was powerful because those committed to Christ were not afraid to lay down their lives for what they beleived. Pastor’s how many in your own churches are committed to even sharing their faith in an honest way with a new person, or committed to living their faith in such a way that someone would ask them about it? Sunday morning Churchianity is one of the cancers that we have to be honest enough to admit exists. And if you are a doctor, that is, a pastor, and you are encouraging the tumor to spread rather than removing it...how long will you remain real and relevant to your community?

I’m not refering to anyone in particular...just those who are so focused on relationships and social needs meeting as the answer to “church growth”. The answer is changed lives through the power of the Gospel. Relationships and Social Needs meeting is a means to an end, just as miracles were for Christ and the early church.
BTW… Jesus “drew a crowd” wherever he went because he was performing miracles, not because of his love for people. Not many saw his love, they mearly saw him as a resource.

I believe that if doing social work is going to be effective (and believe it or not, I think it can be) I believe it has to be done within the context of the Gospel - i.e. hand in hand. However, serving/loving your neighbor, is something that is done to build a relationship that we hope would lead to an opportunity to share the verbal Gospel, but is not dependent upon that happenning in order for it to be an act of obedience to Christ command to love our neighbor.

I think many of the “new leaders”, seem to think the the organization of XYZ church can somehow building a relationship with the organized XYZ community. The problem is, you can’t program that kind of stuff because while the organized local church exists, the only representation of the organized community is other small organization like the local government, local school, etc… When you try to program in that type of actitivy you soon realize that the community might appreciation it, but it does nothing tangible to spread the Gospel - why? Because I don’t believe Christ told his bride to go build relationships with organizations in the community. However, how about targeting leaders of those organizations? For instance, when our town got a new newspaper editor, I sent him a personal letter welcoming him to the community. I then asked him to lunch and to play golf, which we did. We are now good friends. I’m outta time for today, but this has been an interesting dialogue… I know my comments have lots of “holes” feel free to punch right through them.

BTW..I’m not bitter, just concerned that we are focusing on “what’s not right” with the church, when there is so much to celebrate. There are lots of very effective churches, led by Godly leadership, and “doing” church in as many different ways as there are leaders. One size, definitely does not fit all...i think we can all agree on that.

Brian,

I haven’t read everyone’s coments to your comment. However, I completely feel what you’re saying. I too am seeing a redirection of external focused ministry superceding internal church development. My experiences have led me to start thinking in a different direction. In my humblest opinion and without sounding like a broken record, simply put we are not(as a whole) seeing the masses won because Christians are not being empowered for ministry. We’ve spent so much energy on the “social” needs and seeker sensitive individuals that we have missed out on the why. Many of us are doing good for merely the sake of being good to our neighbors. In actuality, we fail to remember the sole purpose is to share the Gospel with the lost. If I could step out here a second and ask, “What’s missing?” Now I’m Pentecostal and I have seen some pretty sad things with churches on my end. No longer am I seeing the raw passionate faith we once carried. We’re so busy with being dignified and appealing to our own selfishness desires that to be “Pentecostal” now is inappropriate. I said all of that to say this, our churches are changing and I’m not so sure it is for the better. What made us who we are seems to be swept under the social/selfish needs of our communities. Let me say this, if we don’t start focusing on strengthening the “church” and develop those individuals within our four walls then how can we really think evangelistically. I believe, just as Brian has blatantly put it; the two must go hand in hand. You cannot have one without the other. I agree we need to meet the needs of others. In fact, I strongly support that idea, but in my experience I have seen too many Christians absolutely lost when it comes to sharing their faith and telling the sinner they need to be saved. Can anyone tell me the amount of time a person has to get saved? That should always be on our minds when we vision the lost.

This issue for me has been a “holy discontent” for some time.  To help me with my personal wrestling I’ve read this book and other resources, and recently had many conversations w/ local church and para-church folks locally.  Couple of things have come from those conversations which align w/ this article.

[These churches have concluded that it’s really not ‘church’ if it’s not ENGAGED (emphasis mine) in the life of the community through ministry and service to others.  Ministry and service are not programs reserved for a few extraordinarily dedicated individuals but are woven into every aspect of life.]

What I’ve learned from my own conversations on this subject is that what we often call “engagement” is not the kind of engagement Rusaw and Swanson are describing.  Over coffee with two NPO leaders these comments were made; (from a director of a homeless shelter) “We have to let our weeds grow so that there is work for all the church youth groups that want to come and ‘engage’ with us during Easter week – then we don’t hear from them again.” (from the director of a secular nursing home) “During Christmas we have to turn away churches because there are so many who want to come visit and sing to our patients, but that’s the only time we hear from the church.  It’s like they are using our patients to help them feel better about themselves.” Ouch!!! 

What I learned from these leaders is that we (the Christians / the church) tend to look for activities which enable us to “punch our community service time card,” with activities that have no real potential for sustainable engagement.  Activity does not equal engagement.  What I decided (for myself) that day over coffee was that I would not be part of anything that doesn’t have intentionally built in mechanisms for people to engage in sustainable ways.  For example, if we’re gonna take a group to a rest home @ Christmas, we’ll find out from the staff how we develop ongoing relationships with residents.  Same with the homeless shelter.  We’ll avoid “one-shot” activities.  Most of all, we’ll look for activities that will help us build the kind of relationships that enable us to engage is such a way that we can earn the right to invite people to engage with us our faith community.

Some have talked here about outreach happening as people invite their friends to church to hear the gospel.  Of course.  But if that was really happening (all the Christians were inviting their non-Christian friends) the church in North America would be growing (the only continent where it is not).  Plus, I believe that there are millions of people who don’t know any Christians through significant relationships.  It is the church corporate that has a responsibility to this segment of our population.  This is where community engagement and social action comes in.  Our churches send people all over the world to do the same thing (engage with unreached people groups), yet we tend to be somewhere between apathetic and adverse to doing it in our back yard.  I don’t get that.

Wendi

I understood that this new book by Rick Rusaw and Eric Swanson was about improving a church’s external focus.  I didn’t think it was excluding the other internal ministries of Christ’s Church.  I didn’t see that it was one or the other. 

For the last several years, I have been trying to guard against “bi-polar internal/external syndrome.” I want to guard against being either too external or internal in my focus and ministry.  That is why I embrace the balance of Willow Creek, Saddleback, and the Church Growth movement.  I am uncomfortable with criticisms of these sincere Christian people who have been trying to bring this balance.

The mission statement of Willow Creek is to turn “irreligious people into fully devoted followers of Christ.” This is both internal and external.

Saddleback’s baseball diamond is about moving people into faith and membership in the body of Christ, build them up to maturity, train them for ministry, and send them out on their mission for Christ.  This is both internal and external too.

Dr. Donald McGavran, the father of the Church Growth movement defined church growth this way:  proclaiming the Gospel until people believe in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, so that they become baptized, responsible, reproducing members of Christ’s Church.  This is both internal and external as well.

Jesus said:  “I did not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.” Perhaps churches that are external as a part of their multiple foci are just doing what our Lord did Himself? 

I remember the story of the five blind persons who tried to explain what an elephant is like. Each of them touched a part of the elephant and reached different conclusions. One felt the elephant’s ears and believed an elephant was like large hand fan.  Another touched its trunk and described it long pipe.  The third man touched the elephant’s legs and said it was like a pillar.  The fourth touched its tusk and thought of a huge nail. The last person concluded that an elephant is just like a broom…he had touched his tail!

In a sense these five people were accurate but far from the truth too.  They had drawn conclusions based on their limited experience of reality.  Yet they were nowhere near understanding what an elephant is actually like.

I think that is what happens to Christians and churches.  Some say is feeding the poor and social action is our calling.  Some say the mission of the church is preaching about sin and salvation.  Some think our mission is internal.  Others think the church is only about winning the lost. Others think it is only within the four walls.  Perhaps it is all of this and even more?  Does it have to be one or the other?

I think we need to develop a philosophy of church that is taken from the New Testament in its totality.  And when one reads the Gospels, the Acts, and the Epistles together, we might find that the church is supposed to be both internal and external.

Thanks for listening.

John...you’re just echoing a Youth for Christ cliche (or Campus Crusade--can’t remember).  It’s not that those cliches are wrong...they’re just not correct all the time.  In some circumstances, it’s just another “rule” to follow in preaching the gospel (funny how we hate rules, so we create new ones). 

Heck, I don’t even know what “earning the right to be heard” means to most people.  For some, it means that I must spend X amount of time with them before I preach the gospel.  For others, it means that I must play X-style music at an event to be able to speak into someone’s life.  I doubt that most people agree on what this means.  I appreciate what you’re saying, but get beyond the cliche, because it doesn’t usually help in the discussion.

As for the article, I’ve read this book and it’s presented incredible challenges and ideas for us.  We want to sharpen our external focus in these early days of our church.  If you’ve never explored this area of your church’s ministry, it’s an excellent work and moves us beyond just sending money to cooperative agencies.  In my opinion, Bob Roberts’ book “Transformation” is another great take on this subject.

I understand the concept of being “externally focused” there is a lost and dying world out there no doubt.  Yes, we need to reach the lost for Christ and build the kingdom of God.  Being externally focused sure beats being inwardly focused where the church is “all about me.” However, I believe the most important place we need to focus our attention on the Lord Jesus Christ and keeping his commandments.  If we would love one another, “all men would know we are His disciples.” If we would “go into all the world and make disciples teaching them to obey whatsover He commanded.” If we would “glorify the Father with our good deeds.”, If we would entrust what we have learned to other faithful men then we no doubt be salt and light and reaching the world for Christ.  There is no program, no philosophy, no misson statement, that can beat the basics of loving the Lord with all of your heart, soul, mind, and strength, and loving your neighbor as yourself.  I think the important thing to remember here is balance.  What good is making converts without making disciples?  What happens within the “four walls” should equip all of us to do the work of the ministry outside the four walls.  A building can only be built as tall or as wide as the foundation is able to bear.  God bless you all as you seek the mind of Christ in this matter.

Janis,
Thanks for your balanced comments. It would be nice if more of the books coming out today would put a disclaimer at the beginning that says, “don’t try this at home kids”.
Seiously, it’s not that ministry paradigms aren’t shifting they are, but they are not shifting at the same time and in the same ways throughout the country. I traveled with an evangelist for 5 years before becoming a full-time pastor. I’ve now pastored in 3 churches over 15 years. I’ve not in anyway, “seen it all”, however, I have seen enough to know that many of the approaches being promoted in some circles of leadership would not be effective at all in a majority of the country - and without balance (which the book promotes, but most of those reacting to this column don’t promote), these approaches will never lead over the long haul, to a successful sustainable local church family.

As for GOING.... we all need to remember that a well designed facility can be a major tool in the hands of a congregation… if a congregation has a facility to open up to community events, youth outreach, etc… the results can be fantastic. Our church of 500 has an open gym/computer game night on Friday for teens. We charge $2 to get in...the kids line up on Friday nights to get in. Over 100 teenagers every Friday night.
As for our 500 people, we were at 350 just a few years ago, stuck at that number. We grew by challenging people to invite their friends to church, providing them with “big events”, to invite them to, then encouraging our people to follow up with the same people they invited in the first place. You know, “old school” We also have done regular training, equipping, etc...(all done in the building of course
People are being impacted during the events we know, but much more ministry, evangelism and impact is happenning before and afterward OUTSIDE the walls for sure.
My point, I think it is clear, is that “traditional” approaches using the facility, big events, drawing a crowd, equipping the people, etc… still works. The types of events have changed, but this type of ministry approach still works in most of the country.
As for community outreach projects, and similar ministry. Most churches in Amercia have always had benevolence ministries. Usually, people come to the church facility seeking help. In our case, people look us up in the yellow pages, or contact us through our web-site or just show up at our door. Once the word gets out that your church provides assitance, those people with need will find you. Really.

As for relational ministry, building relationships before sharing the Gospel, etc… of course that is crticial.... traditional approaches to ministry have always assumed that you would have a relationship with your neighbor, before inviting them to a church outreach event. How about cutting your neighbors grass, offering to watch their kids, helping them mulch etc… it’s not a program, it just being a good neighbor, out of a motivation of Christ’s love.

BTW… there is an “old school” method of using the Sunday School as a major outreach component. As I watch broken families, and listen to single parents, it seems that many of them are much more open to receiving help with their children than we realize. The whole “house church”, and related community outreach approach doesn’t address the necessity of strong organization and well-trained teachers - and the importance at some point, of having a safe, clean facility to bring children to. Another “old school” method is to use our facility as a daycare and preschool. The #1 concern of young families is childcare for the two income family. This is another major way that we use our facility to reach OUT, while bringing them IN. Balance, balance, balance…

It has been interesting reading everyones comments. I think this book does a good job of raising awarenenss of ministry approaches that have always been available to the church. One of my biggest complaints is their confusion surrounding the word “community”.
And my biggest concern is that some churches are trying to do “community outreach” through projects, instead of simply encouraging people to do what we have always encouraged them to do, bear an unspoken and sometimes, when the Holy Spirit leads, a verbal witness to their neighbor (their neighbor being the folks that live two doors down). Thanks for your comments Wendi...I totally agree that we have too many churches and Christians “punching the clock” by doing ministry outreach programs, instead of looking for ways right where they already live and work, to find ways to serve. I wonder, how many people went on a ministry team to serve in the Katrina crises, but have never offered to help their neighbor next door with a service project or act of kindness…

A final BTW… don’t forget that the Word mandates us to care for the orphans and widows in our midst - that would be, within the four walls. That’s what the collections were taken for primarily in the early church. Where is the discussion in the church today that helps us to define and understand this as “true religion”? “they (those outside the four walls) will know we (those of us inside the four walls) are Christians by our love"(our love for each other inside the four walls). Or is it that most of the books being written today, and most of the “emerging church” are churches that are mostly made up of 20’s and 30’s (i’m 35). Maybe these churches and leaders think that you have to GO outside the church to find widows and orphans to minister to. And maybe their churches lack a central meeting location and therefore the poor and needy in the community don’t know where to go to ask them for help.... just a thought…

As many have already said… LOVE GOD, LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR

We don’t go to church. We are the church wherever we are. We gather together from time to time for coporate worship and to enjoy fellowship and “to prepare God’s people for works of service” in the world (Eph 4:12) .  I like the challenge of the Externally Focussed Church for us to look outwards and to take more seriously the challenge of mission in the world around us. But with its focus on encouraging participation in groups already involved in community service (which I do commend and support) it ignores the most significant missionary opportunity of all which doesn’t demand any new programed involvement from us, because it is about supporting Christians to live out their faith in those places where most Christians already spend most of their time encountering and serving non-Christians in the midst of their everyday working lives. Preparing God’s people for authentic Christian ministry in daily life seems to me to be the best starting point. Then ministry starts to be about what every believer does all the time rather than just about what we do with the few hours we can put into special programs outside our other everyday commitments.  How different would our gatherings be if they seriously prioritised a real concern to see every believer better prepared and equipped and supported for this ministry in daily life?