Thom S. Rainer's Blog, page 16

The Real Reasons the Unchurched Do Not Attend (What Your Church Can Do About It)

Do people who attend church regularly have different perceptions of the church than those who do not attend regularly? We wanted to know how both the churched and the unchurched feel about the church.

The Church Answers Research team conducted a large, national study. After comparing the church with the unchurched, we found new, surprising insights.

The unchurched don’t attend mainly because of indifference and not because of busyness or antagonism.

We asked the unchurched why they do not attend church regularly. As expected, a variety of answers surfaced. However, clear themes emerged. They are not upset with the church or too busy for the church. They are mainly indifferent about the church.

On the survey, the unchurched could select up to three reasons why they do not attend church regularly. Their answers are sorted from most common to least common.

The top two answers point to a level of indifference. Non-attendees do not view church as necessary, or they simply got out of the habit of going. The third reason is expected. A portion of non-attendees have different beliefs than those of the Christian church. However, the fourth reason returns to the theme seen in the first two answers: They are indifferent to issues of faith.

Notice the lower percentages for previous bad church experiences (16%), being too busy (15%), or not feeling welcome (11%). What some may believe are hurdles are not that much of an issue. The unchurched don’t think they are too busy, and they are not antagonistic towards the church. Issues like divorce (5%) and poor health (4%) hardly register on the survey.

The catalyst for the unchurched to start attending church is both a spiritual and personal connection.

What is the prompt? What causes someone to start attending church? The answer to indifference is intentionality. The unchurched start attending to grow spiritually and because someone invited them. It’s the combination of spiritual and personal connections.

The survey asked the unchurched why they would start attending church regularly. They could select up to three answers.

The themes in the data are clear. The unchurched start attending regularly because of spiritual prompts: growing spiritually (32%) and God told me to go (20%). The spiritual prompt is coupled with the personal prompt. The unchurched also start attending regularly because someone invited them (22%) and a spouse wants them to go (17%).

As we have seen throughout several decades of research, it’s not good music or charismatic preaching that draws the unchurched. Those factors tend to enhance transfer growth (as seen in the subsequent finding). What the unchurched need is guidance by the Holy Spirit and a personal invitation. While the former is only a work of God, the latter is easily accomplished by any size church in any location in the United States.

Churched people tend to care more about worship style, programming, and denominational preferences than the unchurched, but the top reason churched people attend a particular church is because someone invited them.

The church and unchurched alike attend a particular congregation primarily because someone invited them.

While worship style, location, programming, denominational preferences, and preaching quality have great impact on a churched person’s decision to select a congregation, the top of the list is a personal invitation.

This new data supports our research findings from the last twenty-five years. A personal invitation is the most impactful way to motivate someone to start attending church.

Click here to download the entire report for FREE!

The post The Real Reasons the Unchurched Do Not Attend (What Your Church Can Do About It) appeared first on Church Answers.

The One Thing We Don’t Hear about Multisite Churches

The multisite strategy is ingrained in the American church culture. While the majority of churches will never use a multisite strategy, they are no longer perceived as aberrations and outliers. But something has been taking place steadily that engenders few, if any, conversations. 

Before we look at that “one thing,” let me clarify my understanding of multisite churches. I include the classic definition of a church meeting in more than one physical location. But my definition makes room for “multi-venue” (meeting in more than one place on the same campus). A multi-venue church might have one service meeting in the worship center while another service meets in another place on the same campus. A multi-venue church could also have a service on the same campus on a different day of the week. 

I have not yet included multi-services in my definition of multisite. Still, these additional services on the same site in consecutive time slots do indeed have most of the characteristics of a multisite church. To avoid confusion, for now, I will exclude the multi-service church in my definition. 

Back to my original thesis. What is the one thing we don’t hear about multisite churches? It is obvious, but its implications are hardly ever mentioned. 

The One Thing 

The one thing we never hear about multisite churches is that their creation and implementation can have two significantly different motives. Some churches move to a multisite model to accommodate “overflow” growth. But most churches today move to a multisite model to reignite growth that has stalled or declined. 

My data and numbers are anecdotal, but I have confidence in their trajectory. 

The Two Models of Multisite 

From a strategic perspective, we see clearly how these models are different. The Overflow model is just what it sounds like. The church has run out of room in its worship space, parking, or groups. It has to start a new venue to keep growing. Again, the venue could be a new campus, a different room in the same facility, or a different day, to name a few. 

The Reignite model means that the church has declined or, at the very least, stalled in its growth. The new site becomes a strategy to restart growth. 

We contend that the motive for starting a new site has changed dramatically in the past twenty years. Here are our estimates:Twenty years ago, three-fourths of churches that moved to a multisite model did so to accommodate growth. These churches were almost assured that the new site would start healthy and grow healthy because of pent-up demand for space.

The motive for starting a new site reached an inflection point in 2015. As we move into 2025, we estimate that three-fourths of the multisite efforts will be to restart or reignite growth. The implications for this massive shift are significant. 

Seven Implications of This Shift 

Since most of the multisite efforts shift toward the Reignite model, we must realize that there are several issues we must address. Though not an exhaustive list, here are seven key implications: 

Change will be more challenging. Most church members will understand the need for the Overflow model. The mindset of church members in the Reignite model will typically be more resistant. There is rarely easy growth. The Overflow model has church members and guests ready to move to another site. If nothing else, they are glad to have some space. That is obviously not the case with the Reignite model. The move to another site may prove to be a relocation. If the original site is dying, it might eventually close. The new site will thus be a de facto relocation even if it was not planned to be.There is a greater likelihood of jealousy about the new site. It is common for members of the original site to feel like the new site is getting all the attention. While their motive is self-serving, it is nevertheless a real challenge. Demographic growth is still viable with the Reignite model. If the new site is in an area of rapid demographic growth, there is a good possibility that it will grow. One church I observed found that one-third of their community works at least one Sunday a month. They started a Thursday evening service and reached many successfully. They had more demographic opportunities even though they used the same facility.The leadership skillsets needed for each of the two models are likely different. Though this issue might be a challenge, I have worked with church leaders who have been able to meet this challenge. Indeed, their willingness to start a new site is indicative of a growth mindset they might not have used with the original site.Usually, the timeline for the Reignite model is longer than that of the Overflow model. Several factors could affect the timeline, but it is not unusual for the Reignite model to require a longer period of buy-in. 

Is the Reignite Model Worth It? 

The seven implications above are weighted more toward the negative. For certain, there are likely more challenges with the Reignite model versus the Overflow model. However, I am still hopeful for those churches that use the Reignite model. Frankly, it is often the best step a church can take to move from decline to growth. 

We will gather hard data about these models in the future. We are happy to share any new information with you. 

What do you think about these models? I would love to hear your perspective.

 

P. S. My friend, Tony Morgan, died on September 4, 2024, after suffering a heart attack. Tony and his organization, the Unstuck Group, have been a great resource to local churches, including those who are moving to a multisite model. Please remember his widow, Emily, and their three grown children in your prayers. Remember the Unstuck Group as well as they move into a new era without Tony.

The post The One Thing We Don’t Hear about Multisite Churches appeared first on Church Answers.

The Shift in Churches Caused by 9/11

The events of September 11, 2001 marked a profound and sad moment in American history, influencing almost every aspect of society in the short term. The immediate aftermath saw a noticeable increase in religious observance, but the long-term impact on churches and religious communities was less pronounced.

Where Were You During the Attacks?

I was walking to my Tuesday banking class on the University of South Carolina campus. As I entered the Darla Moore School of Business, I could tell a major event was occurring. People were crowded around televisions. The silence was eerie. I went to class.

I’ll never forget the words from our professor that morning in a half-full classroom: “Something is obviously happening in New York City, but we must stay focused on our assignments.”

About halfway through the 9:00 a.m. class, someone walked briskly into the class and whispered a few words to our professor.

He turned to us, “All of you may leave, and I recommend pulling as much cash out of your bank accounts as possible.”

We now know how perilously close our banking system came to an utter collapse due to liquidity shortfalls. I remember the tough decision of deciding how much to withdraw as I walked to the ATM. Should I pull out all $300? It was a lot of money to me as a 21-year-old back then.

The Immediate Religious Response

The financial impact of 9/11 is well documented. Thankfully, researchers at the time also noted the impact on churches. In November 2001, Barna completed a study comparing pre-attack and post-attack religious beliefs and behaviors.

In the wake of the attacks, there was a significant, albeit temporary, surge in religious participation. Church attendance shot up 25% but returned to normal by the end of 2001. Bible sales also spiked but then quickly returned to typical sales patterns. Many Americans turned to churches and other religious institutions seeking comfort, community, and meaning amidst the chaos and fear. But it was not long-lasting. The moment of comfort did not translate into transformational spiritual change.

More surprisingly, there was a drop in the belief of absolute moral truth at the end of 2001. At the start of the year 2000, almost four out of ten adults (38%) believed there are absolute moral truths that do not change according to circumstances. As reported in the Barna study, this belief in absolute moral truth dropped to just two out of ten adults (22%) shortly after the September 11 attacks. It seems people had increasing doubts about truth, came to the church for help, and then returned to their daily lives.

An Opportunity Lost

Despite the initial uptick in religious involvement, the long-term effects on church attendance and religious commitment were less pronounced. While there was a temporary rise in church attendance, the numbers soon returned to pre-9/11 levels. The immediate increase in attendance did not translate into a sustained commitment to religious practices or beliefs. Many of the unchurched who attended worship services in the aftermath of 9/11 did not maintain their engagement over the following months​.

This pattern suggests that while the attacks temporarily prompted many to seek religious comfort, it did not lead to a lasting revival in religious commitment. The expected long-term increase in religiosity did not materialize, as many people who turned to religion for comfort did not find the experience compelling enough to continue regular religious participation.

A longitudinal study conducted in 2008 revealed the short-lived impact on young adult religiosity and spirituality. According to these findings, no remarkable religious revival occurred among young adults after the events of September 11. While many expected a prolonged uptick in religious beliefs due to the terrorist attacks, it never happened. In fact, in some ways, the opposite followed.

Long-Term Shifts in Religious Beliefs and Views

The events of 9/11 had a complex impact on Americans’ long-term views on moral matters. Contrary to the expectations of many religious leaders, there was a significant decline in the belief in absolute moral truths, with fewer people adhering to the premise of unchanging moral principles. This shift suggests a move towards a more relativistic or situational view of morality, possibly influenced by the chaotic and unpredictable nature of the attacks and their aftermath​.

While church attendance patterns did not shift much following September 11, other changes in beliefs did occur. Two years after 9/11, Gallup did a study and found some attitudinal and behavioral changes were sticking more than others. Most evident was the increase in American patriotism, a significant rise in people believing terrorism is a major problem, and lower support for immigration. Two decades later, defending the country from terrorist attacks has been at the top of the public’s policy priorities since 2002. Immigration remains a contentious issue.

Additionally, the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent War on Terror contributed to changes in attitudes towards Muslims and Islam in the United States. Initially, there was a rise in favorable views towards Muslim Americans as the country rallied together in the face of a common enemy. However, over time, this unity faded, and suspicions of Muslims increased.

In a series of Pew Research Center surveys conducted in 2014, 2017, and 2019, Americans were asked to rate various religious groups on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 represented the most negative perception and 100 the most positive. Across these surveys, Muslims and atheists were consistently rated among the lowest, indicating cooler attitudes towards these groups.

The Role of Religious Institutions Post-9/11

The role of religious institutions in the aftermath of 9/11 was multifaceted. While they provided immediate emotional and spiritual support, many struggled to maintain the engagement of new congregants in the long term. According to Mark Chaves, a sociologist at Duke University, the spike in church attendance was short-lived, and the overall trend in American religiosity continued its gradual decline, which had begun in the 1970s. This decline is characterized by fewer people claiming religious affiliations, attending services regularly, or professing belief in God​.

The fleeting nature of the post-9/11 church attendance bump highlights a broader trend in American society: the growing individualization of religious and spiritual beliefs. More people began to identify as “spiritual but not religious,” seeking personal spiritual experiences outside traditional religious institutions. This shift has been particularly pronounced among younger generations, who are less likely to attend church or adhere to organized religion compared to older generations​​.

The impact of 9/11 on American churches and religious life is a story of initial reaction followed by a return to pre-existing trends. While the attacks prompted a temporary increase in religious activity and a brief sense of national unity, these effects—unfortunately—were not sustained. The lesson for churches today is simple. Even the most dramatic, fear-inducing phenomenon is not enough to sway the public to attend church for a sustained period. We eventually revert to previous patterns and behaviors, as evidenced more recently by the 2020 pandemic. We tend to remember the events and the emotional impact on us at the time, but these events alone are not enough to change behavior in the long run. 

This premium research article is available only to Church Answers members. We are unlocking it for 48 hours only. If you want to become a member and have access to all premium research articles, click here .

The post The Shift in Churches Caused by 9/11 appeared first on Church Answers.

The New Mid-Size Church Advantages

Fifteen years ago, I wondered if mid-size churches might go extinct. Would they dwindle as people transferred into megachurches and planted new churches? The mid-size church is still here, and I’m glad I did not publish my thoughts. Now, they have several growth advantages in North America.

What is a mid-size church?

An exact definition does not exist, but most experts will use average worship attendance figures as the primary consideration. Karl Vaters offers this breakdown in his book, The Grasshopper Myth.

House Church: Less than 25 (and meeting in a house)Small Church: 25 to 200 (or under 25 meeting in a church building)Mid-Size Church: 200 to 350Big Church: 350 to 2,000Megachurch: Over 2,000

In a previous Church Answers article, my father, Thom Rainer, gave a slightly different breakdown of church sizes.

Under 50 in attendance: smaller churches51 to 99: mid-size churches100 to 249: large churches250 and above: larger churches

In a survey by Chad Brooks, he uncovers a wide view of how people perceive church size.

Small churches can be anywhere from 0 to 250Medium churches can be between 30 to 1000Large churches could have anywhere from 75 to 10,000

Why the differences between each of these categorizations?

Brooks uses perception as the primary guideline.Rainer uses statistics as the primary guideline.Vaters uses a combination of statistics and people’s perceptions.

All are valid ways of defining a mid-size church, and there are other considerations beyond mere size. For the sake of brevity, I’ll define a mid-size church in this way: A mid-size church is between 150 and 300 people on at least 3 to 7 acres with a campus large enough to accommodate everyone. These churches have an annual budget between $200,000 and $750,000.

I will concede my definition is more narrow than it is broad. It’s intentional, as I want to cover the distinct advantages of these churches. It’s also worth noting that the median church size in North America is around 65 average weekly attendees. For many, a mid-size church of 250 people would feel large.

What are the advantages of a mid-size church?

Mid-size churches are gaining in desirability among younger generations. As I wrote previously, the megachurch movement is waning with the aging Baby Boomer generation. Around 2010, at the same time I was wondering if mid-size churches would survive the megachurch phenomenon, the number of megachurches stalled. In 2010, the movement reached an inflection point with about 1,600 megachurches in the United States. Over the next ten years, up to the pandemic of 2020, the number of megachurches dropped to about 1,200. Today, the number is even less, perhaps below 1,000.

What is happening? The megachurch movement was a Baby Boomer phenomenon. They grew as Boomers came of age and transferred from smaller and mid-size churches in the 1980s, 1990s, and early 2000s. Many of these megachurches are still large, but they are much older in average age. Younger generations value proximity more than size. Millennials are the least mobile generation since the 1940s. They stay put in their neighborhoods and prefer not to drive long distances to work or the big regional church across town.

Mid-size church campuses are large enough to accommodate growth but small enough not to be overcome by deferred maintenance.

I met with a megachurch pastor a while back to discuss the future. His church had done well and was seeking the next steps.

“So, what’s next?” I asked.

“Carpet,” he replied. “We need to spend $1 million on the hallways.”

Once you get beyond 50,000 square feet, the campus can quickly become an albatross without regular—and expensive—maintenance. Growing churches with small facilities lament the lack of space. Large churches lament the costs of updating their sprawling campuses. Mid-size churches have the advantage of being a sweet spot: large enough for growth but small enough not to be consumed by the square footage.

Mid-size churches have enough people to build momentum with full programming for all ages.

A family visits your church on a random Sunday. They are new to the community. Mom has experience singing in the choir and wants more information about the worship ministry. Dad would like to connect with a small group. They have three children: one in elementary school, one in middle school, and one in high school. A mid-size church has programming for all of them, something most small churches cannot offer. Additionally, this family can talk with the lead pastor after the worship service about each of these ministries, something not likely to happen in a megachurch.

Mid-size churches typically have enough funds to afford multiple staff members.

Many small churches can only afford part-time pay (but we all know it’s full-time hours). Large churches often employ specialists to lead each ministry. When finances tighten, they must lay off staff. Mid-size churches can have enough staff to relieve the burden of the lead pastor without becoming so large you need a human resource department to manage employees. A church of 250 with a $500,000 budget can often afford three full-time staff, helping share the load. At this level, the lead pastor does not need to drop everything to address every urgent need.

Mid-size churches with good children’s programs are appealing to Millennials.

It’s challenging to grow a church without quality children’s programming. Though mid-size churches will not have all the bells and whistles of a megachurch, they can have programming and facilities that appeal to Millennial parents. The mid-size church has the advantage of connecting personally while also offering quality programs for children.

Mid-size churches can focus on the immediate neighborhood in ways a large, regional church cannot.

Big regional churches are, by design, broad in scope. These churches want to appeal to a large group of people and do not play favorites with specific schools, sports leagues, and civic organizations. A mid-size church in a neighborhood can focus on the high school next door or the park system right down the road. While large churches have greater reach in the region, mid-size churches often have greater impact in their neighborhoods.

Small churches, large churches, megachurches, house churches, and church plants all have a place in the kingdom of God. However, mid-size churches today have some distinct advantages in North American culture. Are you ready to capture the moment? If you are part of a mid-size church, what do you see where you minister?

The post The New Mid-Size Church Advantages appeared first on Church Answers.

Leading When You Want to Quit

In a world that often prioritizes personal fulfillment and happiness, it’s easy to forget that God’s ultimate goal for us is holiness. Our culture is centered on success, recognition, and the pursuit of fulfilling our “passion,” but these things are often fleeting, influenced by circumstances and seasons. As women in church leadership, we will inevitably face seasons where we want to quit or question our calling altogether. In those moments, God is seeking something deeper than what we do or can achieve. He isn’t as concerned with our happiness as we are. God is after something deeper: our holiness.

Holiness isn’t about being perfect or reaching a certain level of success. It’s about aligning our hearts and minds with God’s will and pursuing a life that reflects His character. And let’s be honest—this journey is rarely smooth. It’s filled with ups and downs, victories and failures.

Leading Through Mundane Seasons

Many of us find ourselves in long seasons of mundane tasks and routine responsibilities. There are parts to our jobs and ministries that don’t feel particularly fulfilling or productive. Whether it’s printing handouts, putting in attendance, or setting up and taking down events, these tasks can often feel monotonous and unrewarding.

While these mundane tasks may not be glamorous or exciting, they are essential for the health and growth of our ministries. Everyone, from the most seasoned leader to the newest volunteer, has to deal with these less-than-glamorous aspects of their work. It’s how we respond to these seasons that matters.

Find joy in the small things: Look for opportunities to praise God in the midst of everyday tasks. Seek God’s graces: God is showing up in big and small ways. Keep a journal or list of how you see Him working. Mix it up: If you hate doing a mundane task, make sure you schedule in between things that fuel you. How you schedule your tasks can play a huge role in working through your day. 

Leading Through Difficult Seasons

Difficult seasons can be challenging, but they can also be powerful catalysts for growth. When faced with adversity, we are forced to confront our fears, weaknesses, and limitations. These challenges can push us to our limits, but they can also reveal our inner strength and resilience.

Embrace the struggle: Don’t shy away from difficult situations. Our limits are good and help us to rely on faith instead of ourselves. Resilience: Overcoming challenges can help us build resilience and develop a “never give up” attitude. This resilience can be invaluable in other areas of our lives.Trust in God’s plan: Often where and what we turn to in difficult situations reveals where our trust really is. We can rely on our own abilities, seek out financial security, or manipulate relationships to feel more in control and these all come up lacking. Difficulty leads to faith. 

Leading Through Failed Seasons

Failure is a part of life. Even the most successful leaders have experienced setbacks and disappointments.

Learn from your mistakes: Failure is an opportunity for growth. By analyzing our mistakes, we can gain valuable insights and identify areas where we need to improve.Confess and receive: Confession helps us acknowledge our shortcomings and seek God’s forgiveness. It reminds us that we are not alone in our struggles and that God’s grace is sufficient for us.Seek community: Surrounding ourselves with supportive and encouraging people can make a significant difference in our lives. They can offer guidance, support, and accountability, and remind us of God’s love and mission. 

Remember, God is not after our happiness; He is after our holiness. And holiness is often forged in the fires of adversity. So, let’s embrace the challenges we face, trust in God’s plan, and persevere in our faith. For it is in the crucible of difficulty that we are truly transformed into the image of Christ.

The post Leading When You Want to Quit appeared first on Church Answers.

Who and What Is the Silent Generation?

I’ve often lamented my failure to talk with my dad more frequently. You know how it is. You always think you have more time. When I was a young man in my 20s, my dad was diagnosed with cancer. Even then, I thought I had more time. There were still many questions I wanted to ask him. There were still many conversations I planned to have with him.

Dad died two months after his diagnosis.

I am an old man now. I am a Baby Boomer. I love it when my sons and grandchildren ask me about the “old days” when I was younger. I wish I had been more intentional in asking my dad about his old days.

I wish I had asked Dad more questions. On one occasion, I did ask him about D-Day. His plane flew over Normandy Beach. My son has his flight plan for that fateful day of June 6, 1944. As Dad described the carnage on the beach, he paused in mid-sentence. I looked over and saw him crying. It was one of only three times I ever saw him cry.

I wish I had asked him more about his war experiences.

Dad was a progressive on racial issues in south Alabama in the 60s and 70s when few white people were. I know part of his story. His mother died when he was ten years old. His father, an alcoholic, hardly knew a sober moment after her death. My dad was essentially raised by African Americans who worked for his family.

As a consequence, I was raised in a white family in the deep South that was for equality of all races during the racial tensions of the 60s and 70s.

I wish I had asked him more about the racial issues.

Dad was part of the Silent Generation. That label describes him well. He rarely spoke of his accomplishments. Like many of his generational peers, he let his actions speak more than his words. I am convinced that Dad’s quiet personality influenced me to be the introvert I am today.

Beginning a Journey to Explore Generations

I am again taking a personal journey to describe generational influences. I plan to write about all six living generations within a few months. As a reference, the chart below shows the generation by birth years and by live births. [1]While the different generations can be defined in various ways, I look at it from a purely demographic perspective. First, I look at the live birth patterns from 1928 to the present. I designate a different generation when there is a significant change in the number of live births. Second, I do not go beyond 20 years for any one generation. Third, I use the Baby Boomer data as my key reference point since almost all demographers and researchers agree that an unprecedented baby boom occurred from 1946 to 1964.

The Silent Generation (1928-1945)

The Silent Generation, born between 1928 and 1945, is often characterized by its resilience, discipline, and a strong sense of duty. This generation grew up during a period marked by significant economic hardship, global conflict, and societal transformation. Their formative years were shaped by the Great Depression and World War II, which profoundly influenced their values, work ethic, and worldview.

What You Should Know about this Generation

There are so many things we need to learn about the Silent Generation. Here is a summary of four key issues. The summary does not do justice to the contributions they made,

Resilience in Hard Times. The Silent Generation experienced the Great Depression firsthand. This economic catastrophe taught them the importance of frugality, hard work, and perseverance. Many members of this generation grew up in households where financial stability was uncertain, and luxuries were few. This early exposure to hardship instilled a deep-seated sense of resourcefulness and resilience that would carry them through their adult lives.

World War II and Its Aftermath. World War II played a crucial role in shaping the Silent Generation. Many served in the military or supported the war effort on the home front. The war fostered a strong sense of patriotism and collective responsibility. The post-war period brought economic prosperity but reinforced traditional gender roles, with men returning to the workforce and women often returning to domestic roles.

A Focus on Stability and Security. The Silent Generation sought stability and security in the wake of the war. They valued steady employment, homeownership, and raising families in safe environments. This pursuit of stability often led them to prioritize long-term jobs with a single employer, contributing to the growth of corporate America and the development of the suburban lifestyle.

Contributions to Culture and Society. Despite being labeled “silent,” this generation made significant cultural and societal contributions. They played a pivotal role in the Civil Rights Movement, laying the groundwork for the social changes that would follow in the 1960s. Icons like Martin Luther King Jr. emerged from this generation, advocating for justice and equality.

Their Legacy

The Silent Generation’s legacy is one of steadfastness and quiet determination. They were instrumental in building modern America, contributing to its economic, cultural, and social foundations. Their experiences and values impacted subsequent generations, shaping how we view work, family, and civic duty.

You likely have some members of the Silent Generation in your church. Don’t take them for granted. There are only 19 million people in this generation living today. Based on current mortality rates, there will only be 14 million living five years from now.

Talk with them. Listen to them. Hear their stories. You and your church will be richer for it.

Next Generational Analysis: Baby Boomers

 

[1] My sources for the data in this article are three common bodies of demographic information: The U. S. Census Bureau, Center for Disease Control: National Center for Health Statistics, Statistical Abstract of the United States, and USAFacts.

The post Who and What Is the Silent Generation? appeared first on Church Answers.

Baby Boomers Changed the World (What about Their Religious Composition?)

I often get asked to give talks to different churches, religious denominations, and parachurch ministries. I am always fascinated by what kind of topics they request. It’s a fascinating window into what Christian leaders want to know and what they think church attendees need to learn. Being asked to chart the American religious landscape has become a popular choice for me in the last couple of years. I also get asked to do a webinar or a talk about the future of American religion with a particular emphasis on Generation Z. That’s also a lot of fun because the oldest members of this generation are now in their late twenties, and many of them have reached an age where their religious affiliation is starting to solidify. 

Here’s what I never get asked: the religious composition of Baby Boomers. And I think that is kind of odd. Baby Boomers are the

Already a member? Log in Unlock premium content!

Get access to all Church Answers premium content from our expert contributors plus many other membership benefits.

$9.97 per month

Unlimited access

Join Now

The post Baby Boomers Changed the World (What about Their Religious Composition?) appeared first on Church Answers.

Reflections Fifty Years after My Baptism as a Believer

Fifty years ago yesterday, August 25, 1974, a pastor in southwestern Ohio baptized me as a new believer. A 12-year-old classmate had shared the gospel with me almost a year earlier, and God’s Spirit worked on my heart for all the intervening months. One week prior to my baptism, God made me His child when I gave my life to Him the best way I knew how as a 13-year-old. As I think about those life-changing days, here are some reflections that come to mind: 

I will always be grateful for that first church I attended. I had not been raised in a Christian home, but that church family quickly invited me in. Adults taught me the Word. Families invited me to lunch. Folks regularly encouraged me. In my ways, that congregation became my family – closer, in fact, than my family of origin at times. They were a gift to me.I am thankful for my baptism. My own theology is that baptism is not necessary for salvation, but that act of obedience was unquestionably a marker moment in my life. More than once in times of struggle, I’ve remembered God’s saving, transforming grace in my life—and I cannot help but think about my baptism, which was my most public profession of my young faith.I wish someone would have intentionally and strategically discipled me as a new believer. The church made a huge difference in my life, but they did not systematically disciple me. My church’s general approach was, “Come to everything we offer, and you’ll become a disciple of Jesus” – but I did not know how to connect all the dots on my own. Consequently, I struggled growing as a new believer with no Christian witness in my home.I now realize how much I took gathering as a congregation for granted. It was just the norm for me to head to church on Sunday (and other days of the week), and I did so without fear. This many years later, I know there are believers all over the world who don’t have that same freedom. They put their lives on the line to gather – but still they do gather. Fellowship is genuinely life-giving to these folks.I regret that my passion for telling others about Jesus in those early days of my Christian walk has sometimes waned. In those days, I told everybody, and I told them forcefully. I’m sure, in fact, I was obnoxious at times. Some days now, though, I have to work at building evangelism into my life—so much so that I pray almost daily, “God, give me a deep love for You that compels me to tell the gospel story.”Fifty years later, I’m more amazed by grace than ever. It was amazing to me then that God loved me enough to send His Son to die for me. Now, I’m even more amazed because I realize God called me to Himself knowing how often I would fail in the intervening years. He knew me, and He loved me anyway. I often speak of others who are “trophies of God’s grace” for me, and I pray I will be that for others in the years to come.

 God is simply gracious and good. Amen.

The post Reflections Fifty Years after My Baptism as a Believer appeared first on Church Answers.

Catalyst vs. Analyst: How Effective Pastors Master Both Roles in Their Churches

Effective pastors are both analysts and catalysts. Good leaders must accurately describe reality. Good leaders must create a better future. An analyst has a proper understanding of present reality. A catalyst knows what to create for a better future. The analyst helps followers understand the present. The catalyst inspires followers to move towards the future.

All effective leaders are both analysts and catalysts to a degree, but most tend to lean one way or the other. The analyst is more like a prophet, warning about the status quo. The catalyst is more of an inventor designing something novel.

If your default setting is an analyst, you will tend to spend more time assessing current reality. However, there is a downside to assessing without creating: analysis paralysis. No leader can gain enough knowledge to act with 100% certainty. Overanalyzing is one of the most prevalent reasons why church leaders do not move forward.

If your default setting is a catalyst, then you will tend to spend more time creating rather than analyzing. However, there is a downside to creating without assessing. You end up with something like New Coke, a novelty no one wants. Over-creating wears out followers. It doesn’t take long for people to figure out the leader is simply guessing at what will stick in the future.

How can you balance both? What do pastors who are both catalysts and analysts look like?

You navigate at the right pace. The analyst sees the danger. The catalyst is willing to push forward. A pastor who balances both will know how to navigate the dangerous waters of change. In the established church, pace is one of the keys to maintaining this balance. The best church leaders know how quickly they can navigate through change.

You inspire without one-upmanship. The catalyst inspires. However, inspiration detached from reality is simply a game of one-upmanship. Some church leaders get caught in the whirlpool of one-upmanship. Your church is always superior. Every Sunday is bigger than the last. Every event is better than the previous ones. Every sentence of communication has multiple exclamation points. Spiraling around feels like you’re going somewhere fast, until you realize you’re going down.

You help people solve their own problems. The analyst tells people what is wrong with the status quo. The catalyst motivates people to do something about it. A balanced church leader will equip followers to solve their own problems.

You create with a purpose. Creativity without function looks great on the wall of an art museum. There is a time and place to inspire through creativity alone. However, creativity alone is not leadership. Leadership requires creativity to be paired with purpose. A balanced church leader is both a creative catalyst and a purposeful analyst.

Leading as a catalyst is exciting. These types of leaders motivate and inspire. Leading as an analyst is informing. These types of leaders help followers understand. Your church needs you to lead as both. Equipping the saints requires the creativity of a catalyst and the understanding of an analyst.

The post Catalyst vs. Analyst: How Effective Pastors Master Both Roles in Their Churches appeared first on Church Answers.

Eight Typologies of Pastors

One of the greatest gifts of my life is how God allows me to work with pastors. I’ve served as a pastor in four churches and was interim pastor in ten churches. In my last three organizations, I’ve had the honor of focusing much of my time on helping pastors.

I know pastors. I know their hopes, their hurts, and their hurdles. Though a few pastors hurt the witness of churches and Christians, most pastors are sacrificial, helpful, and godly. There are 380,000 Protestant churches in America, and most are led by good and godly pastors.

When I lead a church consultation or coach a pastor, I ask myself: What type of pastor is this person? My question implies that I am looking at pastors through the lens of “types” or “typologies.” After getting to know the pastor better, I often see a dominant and secondary typology. Just by knowing

Already a member? Log in Unlock premium content!

Get access to all Church Answers premium content from our expert contributors plus many other membership benefits.

$9.97 per month

Unlimited access

Join Now

The post Eight Typologies of Pastors appeared first on Church Answers.