Before we get to what they are, let me introduce you to (or remind you of) the Stockdale Paradox.
In his classic leadership book, Good to Great, Jim Collins identifies one of the practices of seriously good organisations as what he calls ‘The Stockdale Paradox’. Named after Admiral Jim Stockdale, who was the highest ranking United States military officer in the “Hanoi Hilton” prisoner-of-war camp during the height of the Vietnam War, the paradox is this: on the one hand, really great organisations face the brutal facts, doing nothing to hide themselves from the reality they confront. On the other hand, they retain unyielding optimism that they will prevail in the end.
So, what are our brutal facts. Here are some:
- We have stopped growing; we are not reaching more people in our cities for Christ.
- 60-70% of the churches of the Diocese are either plateaued or declining.
- Much of the growth we have experienced is through existing congregations joining dead or dying churches. It boosts the numbers, but is a bit of a fudge.
- The most common/effective church turnaround strategy we seem to employ is to get a new minister.
It’s in facing the brutal facts that the necessary urgency to propel change is generated.
We need more urgency about this.
Of course, on the other side of the Stockdale Paradox, we don’t have optimism, we have the living Lord Jesus to put our confidence in, who promise is that the gates of hell will not prevail over the church. So we have no fear.
Speaking of facing brutal facts Christianly, David Bentley Hart’s fabulous article, ‘Tsunami and Theodicy’ makes the point that trust in the God made known in Jesus “has set us free from optimism, and taught us hope instead”.
Wouldn’t it be beautiful to be full of hope as we face the brutal facts of our situation!
Really nice way to capture it!
Is the article online – can you send a URL?
Yep. At First Things — http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=1067
I love it that we don’t just have optimism, we have Jesus, and we have the Holy Spirit, living within us. If that isn’t a confidence booster, I don’t know what is!
Amen and amen!
Andrew, are there any other brutal facts that would be good to confront us with?
Well, I’m sure there are other facts, but at the moment, they are more like impressions / theories, and I figure it’s best to stay out of the realm of speculation!
How about you – any thoughts?
It would be interesting to know:
– how many people our churches are raising up and sending into FT ministry (and compare with the past – not sure if this is possible!) Are we sending, or just maintaining?
– number of enrollments in Moore College, and how this compares with past enrollments.
Steve,
I know enrollments at MTC have been going up until this year, and have just taken a dip. But as far as I know, the number of candidates for ordination is not really growing much.
your brutal facts focus on the diocesan big picture, and your focus in these posts has been the parish. obviously all parishes are unique, but what are the top 3 questions a consultant might ask to unearth the “brutal facts” at the local scene? (and this is DEFINITELY within your pay grade…)
Geoff,
great question – here are some thoughts.
1. How does a person become a Christian around here?
2. What is your understanding of a mature Christian, and what deliberate process of discipleship is employed?
3. How are leaders built here?
4. What do you measure? (What you measure is what you actually value)
5. What concrete connections do you have into the local community?
hey Andrew
slight tangent
but there is a book by bonem and hetherington called “leading congregational change”.
in it they say that the heart of change process needs two things
1. leaders who are spiritually and relationally vital
2. congregations that are spiritually and relationally vital.
not sure exactly how you measure that, but I would be interested in your thoughts.
out of that change dynamic they identify 3 things in a process of moving congregations forward strategically
1. present reality
2. preferred future
3. creative tension (between present reality and preferred future)
my guess is that until we are brutally honest and ruthless accurate with the present reality, the violinists will keep playing.
likewise – if the preferred future is not clearly articulated and identified in real terms
then the reality is there will be less creative tension and the impetus for change. just thoughts
It’s a good idea to face the facts.
Maybe another fact to figure into the calculations is the question of how many Syndey Anglicans are serving oustide the diocese and how many of them are still in ministry.
The Bonem book Shane mentions above is great, one I found very helpful in turning around a declining church.
It was particularly helpful in moving from having ideas about what to do -through to actually doing it.
Good brutal points made Andrew.
Very very little is done by the diocese to help stop clergy getting to the point where they are struggling and not coping.
We train people at the start of their ministry
Then we spend a fortune with PSU on picking up the pieces when things fall apart.
Why aren’t we doing more to stop things getting to the point that they fall apart?
If IRTD I’d put money into clergy marriage enrichment and a compulsory physical and mental health check every 5 years.
A couple of thoughts.
No doubt pastors could get more training, but I don’t think the brutal facts are that pastors are “not working hard enough” / “not loving God” / “not #1 guys” / etc. From what I see, the opposite is true.
Rather, imho, church growth is something that results from people evangelising their friends and acquaintances, under the guidance of their pastor.
I think much of the past Diocesan growth has resulted from absorbing people who were already Christian, and attracted by the Diocese’s theology. That pool of people may now be close to exhausted.
And, of course, a living Spirit-filled church will naturally grow. Perhaps this is a time to focus on internal revival, to some extent. Which is what Shane was saying, I think.
my latest post suggests that for all the talk about strategy, important as it may be, won’t have the spiritual impact that we want it to unless its antecedent in the renewal of God’s people.
i must admit, it is very easy in all the strategy stuff and politic of the diocese of Sydney – to forget God’s power – which in reality is what is needed.
Radagast and Shane,
totally convinced that spiritual renewal is what it’s all about. I guess the thing that puzzles me is the way that if you asked, I don’t know anyone who would disagree, nor even anyone who would say that they are not (at least seeking to be) spiritually vital.
Are there some spirituality issues to which we are blind? (Including perhaps the spiritually corrosive habit of slagging off at others?)
The other question I have is the growth of the pentecostal churches, which as I understand it are getting less and less ‘pentecostal’. There is no doubt great truck loads to criticise theologically etc – is there anything to learn as well?
I guess my concern is that the less explicit spiritual and relational vitality becomes , then it may be assumed , even forgotten.
the other things is that I think it is helpful that gospel vitality drives the structures – otherwise the pragmatics of organisation and strategy can begin to sit looser with biblical patterns etc.
to translate Collin’s “unyielding optimism” – it must always be the eschatological hope that rests in regenerate hearts who have a vision for Christ, the gospel community and the new creation.
re slagging off – I not sure if you are suggesting that this is an issue in general or for me in particular , but I’ll keep a watch on it.
but yes, I think all the right tactics won’t be blessed if we have some defective spiritual DNA.
it surprises me that more churches don’t explicitly state their desire to be spiritually vital.
e.g I belong to a spiritually vital church, but the mission statement on the sign out the front that I inherited says ” we teach the bible here and around the world” – they have stated a means of vitality but not the goal.
re pentecostals, the problem is that you have already separated issues of theology from practice and structures.
sure there is plenty we can learn from them and the mormons and the RSL and LIONs club, as long as realise what is embedded in their structural DNA.
not sure what you mean by less and less Pentecostal – 2nd baptism? prosperity theology? premillennial dispensationalism? methodistic arminianism?
Hear you loud and clear on spiritual vitality. The other side of the problem is that if you include it as one thing on a list, then it looks like you can tick it off, or that other things aren’t a matter of spiritual vitality.
I was teaching a class yesterday on growing a ministry, and had a diagram on the whiteboard, and then wrote ‘PRAY’ over the whole board, to try and capture this.
Didn’t have you in mind about the slagging off thing – just one of things that keeps cropping up about our tribe.
Our mission statement has ‘Biblically vital Christian community’, which we went for because the ‘spiritual’ word can be a bit vague – but not sure that we have quite captured it yet.
As for theology and practice – the separation is only a function of necessity. My perception is that at the moment, by not teaching them in distinct phases by those whose expertise and training is that area, we’re not doing wither especially well, and somewhat fall between the stools. It’s up to the individual to do the integration. And at the same time, I think that integration is best done in the field, not the classroom.
And of course, all learning is critical learning in the best sense of that word.
And not entirely sure what I think about the pentecostals, except that as far as I can tell, theologically savvy people go there with less trouble than than used to.
Andrew, again, a bit slow to comment. But in terms of being brutally honest, agreed that we have to be honest in facing the plateauing of attendances and growth in people heading off the College.
But how do you assess the significance of the growth in offertories reported in the Diocesan Mission Midpoint Report? To quote…
The reason I ask is that it is often argued that offertory figures are less rubbery than counting heads (or feet or toes) and the old saying that the last part of the body to be converted is the hip pocket nerve. The conclusion is that what’s happening with money is a pretty good barometer of commitment.
What do you think?
Sandy,
A growth from $34m to $54m in 6 years sounds impressive, but if you assume inflation at 5% over that period, you’d expect offertories to have grown to $43.4m just because of inflation alone.
So in fact you are only really seeing real growth per annunm of around 4% above inflation each year.
That’s o.k but nothing spectacular.
Considering how little most Christians give as a percentage of their total income, I don’t think it is anything can be proud of.
Richard, thanks for the reply. Pride certainly should not come into it. But perhaps encouragement could.
If we are being brutally honest about weaknesses, perhaps we can also acknowledge gains.
For your information, my quick research on the ABS website indicates that inflation has averaged about 3% p.a. over the period. (However my memory and even briefer research suggests increase in average male weekly earnings has perhaps been closer to your assumption of 5% p.a. in that period.)
So it’s right to adjust for inflation, but the improvement is perhaps a little better than your assumption suggested.
At any rate, I am interested to hear Andrew’s feeling on how to weight this factor against the plateauing.
Sandy,
totally agree about encouragement – I know for me it’s a whole growth area!
It’s certainly a great fact. And points to the growing generosity of God’s people, and perhaps even something of a change of culture among us, so that we are more willing to speak about stewardship.
And I hate to find a cloud for every silver lining, but at the same time, if you turn it over, I guess you’re left with the question of how it is that though we have more significant resources than ever to invest in ministry, we don’t seem to be making much headway. For me, that’s where some of the budget issues I have raised come into play. For example, I wonder how many churches have a line item in the budget for outreach / evangelism? And what kind of staff specialists etc?
Dear Sandy,
I admit perhaps “proud” wasn’t a helpful word to use. And the 5% inflation figure was completely off the top of my head (but a ball park figure) so thank you for looking up the exact figure.
However, my point is that the argument “what’s happening with money is a pretty good barometer of commitment” using the figures from the Diocese offerings is problematic.
The period 2001-2006 was a period of great economic prosperity with a surging stock market. Perhaps giving has increased 10% but the wealth of the average Christian has increased 20%. In this case they are giving less as a proportion of their total income than before so in fact are being less generous even though the offerings are increasing.
My point is that there are very significant other variables which can affect statistics and figures and what people are claiming can be quite false.
What is happening to giving as a percentage of total income would be a more relevant figure when “generosity” or “commitment” is concerned.
It would be interesting to see more up to date figures for this period now when there is an economic downturn.
Rich
Andrew, Richard, good comments just there.
Andrew, yours has force in observing that extra ‘income’ via more offertory has not yet ‘produced’ much.
(Like you I’m sure, I keep hesitating to use this language recalling 1 Corinthians 3, and yet don’t want to use faithfulness as an excuse for foolish farming practices!)
Richard, you are correct about wealth increases via the sharemarket, although how much was realised is another question. That’s also why I mentioned av. male weekly earnings which rose faster than inflation in that time, and also meant that a church’s main expense (its staff costs) rose faster than inflation – at least for our diocese where staff costs are pegged to this measure.
I still think you are perhaps being overly negative about the growth in offertory which even adjusted is significant.
The gain I think this indicates is that maybe we Anglican pastors are getting over our inability to speak about money, and lead in terms of generosity. Growing up, no one talked about money at church, unless it was the wardens in a crisis. No one taught me about biblical stewardship and gospel generosity until I was an Assistant Minister with John Gray. But in the last decade, I reckon we have been getting better at it, by and large avoiding the prosperity traps of the legalism of demanding the tithe as law. So that’s good.
But Andrew is asking the harder question of whether what we do with our increased income is being very effective.
And I am all in favour of building a greater culture of review.
[…] they do provide you with the springboard to start facing the brutal facts with hope. They do give you the evidence you need to make good decisions. They will help you […]