Organizational Models and the Church

Exploring with churches the opportunities for ministry and service often shows significant need in the areas of organizational development and relationship building.Communities of faith have often been the unsuspecting recipients, rather than the instigators, of organizational models for church ministry. Many denominational bodies have utilized patterns for church development that are presented as models for duplication and in turn often frame structures and programming. At times those efforts have brought forth fruit, and on other occasions, they imposed a whirlwind that at best may have met the needs of only a very narrow range of churches.

We don’t have to look far to find evidence of great success and great failure in utilizing “packaged plans.” Church planting efforts staged by the North American Mission Board and its collaborators often evidenced a very small rate of success in “getting young congregations off the ground.” In fact, less than 1 in 20 according to some analyses were even in existence after 5 years. That realization should have sparked some significant reworking of church planting models, but it did not. Instead the patterns of “sink or swim” support for young pastors and churches continues to set the stage for ongoing weakness and a landscape of “tiny church” development that often creates dismal opportunity for future growth and effective ministry.

Specifically, data indicated that models of church planting that were not indigenous within communities, but rather were efforts imposed from outside those communities found little success. Some might ask then, “How did any church get started?” They were most often successfully begun by Christians who as members of a community joined together to establish a church. Short-term and artificially created communities do exist (i.e. military compounds, prisons, or newly planned communities established by corporate builders) but the gathering of those people who eventually form those communities, while random and a function of economic development, do eventually coalesce into some units of gathered cooperation over time…churches can at that point find the internalized initiatives within those communities to emerge.

Today, there is evidence that many congregations are limited in their abilities to carry out effective ministry by organizational models that were imposed upon them at some point in time, and perhaps with good result, but which in the meantime have continued without change and now hinder rather than enhance ministry endeavor.

Generational shifts alone have made some models of organizational “style”ineffective. Demographic changes equally have influenced countless congregations that may be vibrant in spirit, but poor in resources and burdened with a history of imposing structure and now derelict effectiveness.

Recalibration is an important aspect of scientific instrument use and measurement. Changes in temperature, humidity, and air pressure can create differencesthat must be taken into consideration for precise measurements. Similarly, churches that fail to recalibrate their organizational structures in accordance with changing conditions often find their effectiveness diminished.

Church documents that “show their age” by reflecting a structure of organizational relationships that no longer exists need updating for more useful explanation and clearer effectiveness in charting the course of responsibilities and expectations. Models that often need rethinking are those that repeatedly exclude certain groups of persons within the church from participation. Self-perpetuating models that become “clubish” more by habit than intention should not be allowed to stand over against mission, all the while diminishing the work of the church. The opportunity of as many as possible of a Christian community to be equipped and engaged in ministry and witness is critical to the life and vitality of congregations. In other words, there should not be a felt need to “get permission” to act in the name of Christ. Structures that mitigate against ministry rather than for it should be recalibrated, discarded, or reworked.

Churches that have suffered fractures of relationship, theological diversification to the point of disunity, and that continue to show an unwillingness to seek reconciliation inthe spirit of Christ’s love, will continue to be suffer the outcomes of dysfunctional witness. Such a state yields broken community, suffering souls, and the abandonment of shared dreams and visions. Only in repentance, renewed commitment, and in a recalibration of present circumstances will such congregations emerge from conflict to a restoration of grace and grace-giving.

Organizational models have never been the basis for effectiveness. Personal and corporate commitment to the way of Christ has marked the vitality of ministry and service in congregations that are showing effectiveness today. Testimony, service, discipleship – all are marks of congregations that find at their core the incentive of grace to share their faith in ways that bear witness to the world. We must organize and yes,value that organization that allows creative, positive, Christ-like witness to the world. But we cannot stand still; we cannot refuse to acknowledge the present as our time for engagement and service; and we cannot be intimidated by the past in such a way as to refuse to act to bring glory and honor to our Lord today.