It is said that the internationally known church consultant, Lyle E. Schaller, opens his consultations with the question:  What year is it here?  I stumbled upon the question while preparing for a new course on trends in worship and found it intriguing.  The question is bold, probing, and almost insulting to answer.  What year is it?   It assumes the possibility that intelligent people in the 21^st century could not know what year it is.  What year is it here?  (As though it were possible for it to be one year here and another everywhere else.)  It sounds like the kind of question that nurses ask early Alzheimer’s disease patients when I am visiting them in the hospital.

And yet, anyone who leads the church must admit that the question is not an insult, it is genius.

I look at the church from the vantage point of worship, where Lyle’s question practically proves that the church has some form of Alzheimer’s disease and does not appear to understand or care about the year that everyone else lives in. In my travels, I find that is it normal to find 1850s “Stand Up, Stand Up for Jesus” churches nestled on the city’s church row beside a 1984 “As the Deer” church – with the latter claiming to be contemporary despite its 30-year time warp!  If you were to look more closely at my two hypothetical extremes, you might find that the songs mentioned were stylistically supported by worship resources that were nourishing to worshippers at the time that those songs were written – in 1858 and 1984 respectively.

This raises a critical question for worship theologians.   Should it matter to the Church what year it is?  Why, aren’t the music, the language, and the texts of the church timeless?  We who lead churches know that the answer is both yes and no.  Yes, there are some timeless qualities about the ethos of the Church.  But, no, not everything is timeless.  From time to time, the worship aids used by churches must be updated or adapted for new worshippers, while retaining meaning.

The original function of memorized or written liturgy was to give worshippers a tool to enter the presence of God.  I invite you to also view songs sung in worship as a worship aid, a tool to help congregants actually worship and come into the presence of a Holy God.  How do we select music for the 21^st century?  Consider the following:

1. There are some songs and hymns that proverbially stand the test of time.  By this, we mean that the texts and sometimes their tunes transcend time and culture and convey meaning for multiple generations.
2. For every timeless hymn, there are many more hymns and songs with a very limited shelf life.  These songs and hymns were helpful tools for worship for their time, but times have changed and now people either find their texts awkward or their tunes meaningless.  Some of them were born in a spiritual movement.  For example, the genre of Christian music that emerged during the Civil Rights Movement is said to have fueled the movement by inspiring people of multiple races to remember the biblical principles for which they were demonstrating.  Once the movement was over, the music of the movement quickly retreated into history. The same could be said of music that emerged during several of North America’s spiritual awakenings.  These songs were targeted and specific.  While they fulfilled their purpose in their time, times have changed and the people today who need an awakening are often unable to hear their message.
3. And then, there are a number of songs whose texts continue to convey meaning, while the tunes no longer connect with our times or vice-versa.  What do we do with them?  Perhaps we could take a cue from younger generations who have become skilled in pairing them with different texts or more contextually relevant tunes.  Two important words to remember as you consider using music from another era are remix and mashup.  A remix involves repackaging the text or the tune with either a new set of lyrics or a new tune.  A mashup goes a step beyond to pair the familiar text and tune with a more contextual one.  Charles Wesley’s “O for a Thousand Tongues to Sing” (1739), has recently been both remixed and mashed up in very distinct, culturally relevant ways. Mark Miller provides a recent example of a remix http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gslyMd0MPqs&list=PLNBJvha6_28gwenRztnmDkdUmc9KbG39p  and the David Crowder Band provides a popular example of a mashup http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWekq9bHtKU.

What year is it here?  As you plan and lead worship, keep Schaller’s question in mind.  And, as you look for solutions, consider avoiding the time warp by remembering remix and mashup.

There’s always a danger in categorizing, since reality is rarely fully captured in a category.  It tends to get people thinking “either/or” rather than “both/and,” emphasizing the contrast more than the compatibility.  But I’ve decided to take that risk to float a perception I’ve been developing and refining for the past several years.

Some pastors or ministry leaders are ministers.  These individuals focus their gifts on the doing of ministry – making calls, offering counsel, preaching sermons, leading Bible studies, etc.  Their focus is on edifying believers.  Their joy is found in direct ministry, investing in people in one ministry context and they carry within them a vision for what a church can become.

Others are multipliers.  Much of their joy comes vicariously and indirectly through the multiplication of disciples, leaders, gatherings and churches.  Their focus is on equipping believers.  They cherish the ripple effect, some of which they witness personally but much of which they relish from a distance as others carry out additional iterations of ministry expression.  They carry within them a vision for a movement that transforms a community, city or country.

The vast majority of those in full-time vocational Christian service are ministers.  They shepherd congregations that already exist and seek to bring health and vitality to the believers that belong to those churches.  Like Timothy, they steward the commission to “discharge all the duties of your ministry.” (II Timothy 4:5).  A small minority (10%?) are multipliers who focus on Kingdom territory yet to be taken with an ambition similar to the Apostle Paul’s (Romans 15:20).

What do ministers need?

• To know they are valued.  The work of church planting or creating venues seems to get more attention, and at times they wonder if what they are doing matters.
• To know what fruitfulness looks like in the fulfillment of their calling.  Church growth can be easier to measure than church health, and both are worthy pursuits.  Thankfully, continued exploration of measuring church health is helping ministers to know if their contribution is making a difference.
• To have people stand with them.  The same passage that calls them to “discharge all the duties of your ministry” warns that there are “people who will not put up with” truth that challenges them be transformed (II Timothy 4:3).  When you’re working in settings that have been around for decades, there are often well-establish power blocks committed to preserving the status quo, and introducing change can be perilous.  They need allies and advocates.

What do multipliers need?

• To know they belong.  Because their entrepreneurial spirit often compels them to adopt a “better to ask forgiveness than ask permission” approach they can feel alone in an environment where loyalty equals conformity.  So many with this multiplication ambition wonder if they belong in the world of business rather than ministry, or in non-denominational or parachurch ministry.  Because they are in the minority, it takes intentionality by the majority to include them.  They also need to be connected to and affirmed by other multipliers within the movement.
• They need freedom.  This is not freedom from accountability – that would be unbiblical.  They need freedom from being micromanaged, freedom from a framework that communicates unity means uniformity, freedom to find resources and follow examples beyond the movement in order to build the movement.
• They need challenge and space.  I often find myself saying to such individuals “God has not only placed a church in your heart, He has placed a movement in your heart.”  They need a territory to claim through multiplying venues and churches – too much overlap with other multipliers or a “franchise-mentality” (existing churches believing they have exclusive rights to a territory largely unreached) hinders the distribution of these individuals throughout a state, nation or the world.  Like communication satellites, they must be strategically placed at appropriate distances to provide the coverage that is necessary.

Building the Church of Jesus Christ and extending the Kingdom of God is not either/or, but both/and – multipliers and ministers.  Perhaps that’s the reason Ephesians 4 lists multiple roles to equip believers and build the Church – “So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service so that the body of Christ may be built up…” (4:11-12)

If your church could reach more people for Christ by focusing on one “people group” in your community, would you do so?

Certain people around your church are more receptive to the Gospel than others.  I suggest that good stewardship of your church’s human and fiscal resources calls you to find and focus on these receptive people.  They are the “fertile soil” (see Mt. 13:1-23) who are “ripe unto harvest” (Jn. 4:35).  And your successful evangelistic results will be praised by the Master with the same words heard by those who returned more talents than they had been given: “Well done, good and faithful servant” (see Mt. 25:14-30).

The “Receptivity-Resistance Axis” below illustrates a person’s openness to becoming a new creation in Christ.  Every non-Christian is somewhere on this Axis.

Some people are open and responsive to the Good News—the “good soil,” as Christ described them in the Parable of the Sower.  Others are resistant to the Gospel—the rocky soil.  When Jesus concluded this parable with, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear,” I believe he was suggesting that the Good News we proclaim will not be received with equal receptivity.  And we are called to identify those who will hear, listen, and respond.

It is also important to note that people are always moving on this Receptivity-Resistance Axis; some are moving toward greater receptivity, others toward greater resistance.

A key question I hope you’re asking is: “How do we identify the receptive people in our community?”

One proven way is through life events.  Or, more specifically, transitional life events.  Here is the principle: The more disruptive a life event is to a person’s psychological equilibrium, the more it will cause him/her to be spiritually receptive.

Robert Pierson rightly observes: “People most often make decisions for Christ when they are going through transitions. Most do not make decisions about new commitments and directions in their life when everything is going well. We make those decisions when we are in the midst of stress and difficulty. When the church is there to help and share the gospel at the point of their greatest need, people respond, because those are the times people are the most open” (Needs-Based Evangelism, Abingdon Press, 2006, p. 28).

The “Social Readjustment Scale” below was originally developed by two cardiology researchers at the University of Washington Medical Center.  The events were identified as precipitators of a heart attack.  (The numbers to the right are the relative severity of the event, from 1-100.)  I, and other researchers, have found that these same events are also excellent indicators of a person’s openness (receptivity) to Christian conversion.

Put simply, people who rate high on this Scale will be more receptive to repentance and conversion than those who rate lower.  And, when multiple events occur, in relative proximity, receptivity increases even more.

As you think and pray about responding to Christ’s command to “…go and make disciples,” use this “Stress Scale” as one way to begin identifying the people in your community whom the Holy Spirit may be preparing to invite into the Kingdom—through you and your church.  Creative, caring, genuine, need-meeting Christian love—at these times when people are most receptive—will bring great fruit.  Watch… listen…be sensitive to these windows of opportunity… and then be ready to “give witness to the hope that is within you” 
(I Pe. 3:15).

There’s just something about Stephen. He possesses the most important preaching characteristics. Acts 6:10 states “But they could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit with which he (Stephen) spoke.” The content of Stephen’s preaching (“wisdom”) and his character (“Spirit”) became a brick wall for the enemies of the Christian movement. Stephen demonstrates that when sermonic content and the preacher’s character are congruent with Christ, preaching is hard to “withstand.” Most of us would agree, I think, that wise sermonic content is a necessity for Christian proclamation. However, I wonder if the Church has forgotten the other side of the Stephen-coin, that the Christ-congruent character of the preacher is just as important as Christ-congruent content.

Do I sound a bit like a Donatist? The Donatists of the 4th century put too much emphasis on the character of the clergy. They believed that if the priest administering the sacrament of Communion was a spiritual weakling, then the sacrament would not be efficacious for the recipient. Augustine was among the chief opponents of the Donatists. He asserted that the grace of God comes through the sacrament regardless of the spiritual state of the person serving the sacrament. This historical controversy begs some pressing contemporary questions? If we over-emphasize the person of the preacher might we become homiletic donatists? Do we really want to suggest that the preacher’s character has significant bearing on the effectiveness of the sermon? Can a preacher’s sinfulness really inhibit the power of God that comes through the preaching event?

Clearly, we need to avoid extreme homiletic donatism. But, we must be just as suspicious of homiletic docetism. Docetism was a heretical belief of the 2nd century that denied the physicality of Christ. Docetism under-emphasized the humanity, or personhood, of Christ. Homiletic docetism, then, is an extreme neglect of the person of the preacher. A homiletic docetic thinks preaching is entirely dependent on divinity and that humanity, or the preacher, doesn’t matter at all to the dynamics of preaching. As long as God shows up through the preaching, nothing else matters-not even the preacher!

It seems to me that, somehow, the Church must live between the extremes of homiletic donatism, an over-emphasis of the preacher’s character, and homiletic docetism, a complete denial of the importance of the preacher. For some reason, God has decided to do his best work through a combination, a wedding together, of divinity with humanity. The Bible is the divine word through the humanity of its authors. The Incarnation is the act of divinity coming through humanity. And the sermon, as far as I can tell, is another example of our gracious God’s willingness to come to us through us, divine truth bursting through a human agent we call preacher. Stephen proves that when a good sermon, full of divine “wisdom,” comes through a good preacher, full of the “Spirit,” that the homiletic sparks fly!

So, what do you think? Are you more prone to be a homiletic donatist who is so enamored with the holiness of the preacher that the sovereign power of God through preaching is ignored? Or, are you more likely to struggle with a homiletic docetism that ignores the role and person of the preacher in the preaching event? Does your theological tradition lead you toward one of these homiletic heresies? Most importantly, how can you avoid both extremes through your development and delivery of sermons?

You are invited to the Festival on Preaching!
The human hunger for life-giving, hope-inducing, and identity-shaping good news has never been more intense. Yet the complexities of preaching today are more significant than ever. The Festival on Preaching is designed to inspire and equip preachers to meet these challenges and maximize the opportunities of preaching today. On May 20-21, Wesley Seminary and College Wesleyan Church are co-hosting what we pray will be a significant investment in your preaching ministry. For more information and to register click on the following link: Festival on Preaching.

The $25 registration fee is waived for Wesley Seminary students!

“If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that its stupid.” – Einstein

We have come to understand that people do not all learn the same way. Through trial, error, and observation educational theorists have concluded that people learn through a variety of means and our personal experience as both students and teachers confirms that to be true – different people learn best through engagement of different learning styles (hear it, see it, touch it, explore it) and different instructional formats. We also know that different people learn best in a variety of environments and conditions – supposedly girls learn best in a room that is yellow while boys learn best in a room that is blue for example. Howard Gardner also suggested that there is not one measurement of intelligence but “multiple intelligences” that include spatial, bodily kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, linguistic, logical-mathematical, naturalistic, and existential. Each modality relates to certain skill sets or abilities and being “smart” in one of the intelligences does not necessarily mean you will be “smart” in all just like being “not so smart” in one does not necessarily mean you will be “not so smart” in all.

We could spend a lifetime analyzing how people learn and continue to be amazed at the complexity and individualism involved in the learning process – we truly are “wonderfully made”.

Unfortunately what we know to be true does not always impact our practice, which is why many people experience educational failure. Our educational systems, although fully aware of varied needs in learning, often provide an educational experience for a few while ignoring and thus frustrating many. We have all seen the child, teen, or young adult come home from their failed educational experience and refer to themselves as “stupid” – frustrated at their lack of ability to learn perhaps due to an educational system that did not understand their learning style needs; an educational system that expected the “fish to climb a tree”.

It is easy to “throw stones” at educational institutions, especially public education, and their inability to adapt to the needs of their students, but do our own Christian “educational systems” also ask fish to climb trees? Do we truly function in a way that demonstrates we fully understand God’s unique creation and individual learning needs or does our approach seem to suggest in faith formation “one size fits all”?

Think in your mind to the last small group you facilitated, Sunday school class you taught, worship service you led, or sermon you preached and ask yourself – was everyone in the room engaged? Could you see by their expression, eye contact, and reactions that they were engaged, excited, learning, and growing? If your answer is a resounding “YES!” awesome – keep investing in your people and seeing great reward. If you are not quite as confident, below are a few things to try:
• Vary your style of “delivery” (how predictable are you?)
• Incorporate their sense of smell (women are more likely to remember when the “lesson” is tied to a smell)
• Give them a chance to move or at least use their hands
• Help them become a part of the story and truly experience it
• Give them a chance to talk
• Connect the main point to an image, icon, picture, or video (give them a picture in their mind to remember)
• Get out of the room and change the environment
• Put music to it
• Let them create something
• Pay attention to who is bored, asleep, disengaged and make it your mission to find out what they need in order to learn

Learning plays a significant role in formation, and Christian education experiences should result in spiritual growth. How well are your people learning and growing?   No one should think they are “stupid” when it comes to faith formation.  Provide experiences that engage all of your people and please provide an opportunity for your “fish” to swim!

Rev. Colleen Derr, Ed. D.

Assistant Professor of Congregational Spiritual Formation and Christian Ministries

I am writing this blog post in the shadow of the bombings at the Boston Marathon today.  I had planned to write a different blog post but I am forced by circumstances to ask the question:  will we have forgotten the tremendous horror and suffering of our neighbors in the East by the time that Sunday worship comes?  By this, I mean will the bombings receive more than a sentence of the pastoral prayer as we rush to the happy clappy music that we have grown to love or will we sit in the ashes with them to grieve and pray – even for just a little while?

I was pastoring a church in Asbury Park, NJ when the planes of 9/11 changed the way that we relate to one another. We only had to drive a few miles up the coast to see and smell the flames that burnt for weeks; every conversation with pastors of neighboring churches revealed new levels of loss and pain.  Since much of the Jersey shore was a bedroom community for New York City, the losses were surprising:  church members who worked in the WTC building, sons and daughters of the area churches who worked as support staff in the massive high-rise.  One church lost most of its administrative council on that fateful day!   Those of us who were so close to New York, who had lost someone from our families or social networks, sat in pain and sorrow for months.  In downtown New York City, pastors experienced on-the-job training in helping the community (not just their members) work through grief and loss. My church was 75 miles away.  Ironically, as close as we were to the epicenter of the wave of pain that swept across the region, pastors found it difficult to allow the grief, and the questions that were undoubtedly directed at God, to come to church!  Once phone service was restored and we were able to talk to our friends across the country, we were saddened to learn that in many churches, our grief had been reduced to a footnote in the morning prayer. A few hundred miles and a Sunday or two removed, it was back to happy clappy as though nothing had happened!

As bombs and violence continue to break out in the most unlikely places, it has become “normal” for us to become desensitized to their impact. Sadly, it has also become normal for us to draw into the safety of family and close-friend circles while scanning our surroundings for potential (or imagined) danger.  The unintended consequences of needing to play it safe, is that we have so “contracted”  or drawn into safe places, that the arms of hospitality, friendship, neighborliness, and concern for people everywhere have also shortened.  To the extent that we may not have recognized that when Boston was bombed, our neighbors were bombed too!

Yet, the issue, I raise about today’s bombings and Sunday’s worship is more than sociological. I believe it to be more than our not recognizing our neighbors because we are so drawn into ourselves.  I propose that worship reveals both the community’s affirmation of faith and theological stance. Retired Old Testament scholar, Walter Brueggemann, often talks about the need for lament in the life of a congregation.  When things are not well with our souls, he encourages, this is the time to vary the order of worship and allow the entire community to engage in a time of a lament.  There are several examples of this in Old Testament life.

We have so many neighbors standing in the need of prayer.  On any given day, we are reminded of neighbors who have been flooded or quaked, bombed or shot, snowed in or displaced or challenged beyond their strength in any number of ways – the most recent being this tragedy in Boston!  What might happen if hundreds of churches across the continent and places beyond abandoned the order of worship in favor of a call to fervent prayer?  What would it be like to have an entire service devoted to intercession for those who grieve and for those who have been wounded in the process of just trying to live?  What would it look like to transform so many praise houses into houses of prayer?

Sunday’s comin,’ and though the evening news will have moved on to something else of interest, our neighbors out East won’t be able to move on for some time.  You still have time to make a few changes in the order of worship.

Although I currently worship at a larger size church, I have spent a fair amount of my life attending smaller churches. Recently I attended a smaller sized church, and it gave me some time to reflect on these numerous islands of Christ that permeate America.

Their number is a little deceiving.  For example, 1 in 5 Wesleyans attends a single large church. That means this large church has the numerical equivalence of hundreds and hundreds of small Wesleyan churches.  So while the small church outnumbers large churches in buildings, it does not outnumber the people in larger churches or the influence.

Churches of all sizes are notorious for their antics from time to time.  A large, seemingly fruitful church can undergo a split and its pieces disintegrate. This can especially be the case when a church is built around a particular charismatic personality.

But smaller churches have their splits too.  In a small church a strong individual can wreak untold havoc.  A person with a key decides to paint the inside of the church without telling anyone. Another person leaves because the pastor took down the attendance billboard in the back by the door. Small churches can also be islands of legalism, where visitors who do not dress correctly are snubbed.

A church of any size can get distracted from the bottom line of Christians being in the world: love God and love each other. In church, we love God in worship.  We love each other inside the walls by getting along.  We love those outside the walls by mission. That’s really all there is.  The rest is distraction.

God doesn’t care what the music is, who plays the piano, or who sings the special song. If the worshipers are worshiping, that’s good enough for God. It’s not an excuse to fight with each other. Worship wars show that Satan has gotten the best of us by distracting us.

We can get caught up in fighting political issues from the pew and pulpit. Sometimes this is also a hard heart disguised as faith.  Are you preaching love of one another in the church and love toward both friend and enemy outside the church?  If not, you’ve gotten distracted. The prophetic message is primarily a message for others, not against them. So who is your message protecting or wanting to rescue–or is it just an excuse to excoriate sinners because you think it is allowed in this case?

The thought occurred to me, What would happen to the small churches of America if they focused on loving each other inside and outside their walls?  What if, whenever someone felt like fighting over anything, you returned to the theme–anything but love is a distraction?

I don’t like that style of music. Distraction. I don’t like the way that family dresses. Distraction. Those kids are disruptive and should not be allowed to come back. Distraction. We need to contact our politicians. Probably a distraction.

Might it not transform the church?  Might it not transform America?  A friend of mine said here’s what would happen: they wouldn’t remain small churches for long.

Click on image to view larger.

Behold the following 6.15 reasons why you want to come to the 6:15 event on April 4th:

#6) Because you want to see inside the new Seminary facility!

#5) Because you want to see if your professors can speak for only 15 minutes each!

#4) Because you want to do penance for missing the first 6:15 event last October!

#3) Because you want to visit the seminary to discern God’s will for you life!

#2) Because you want to eat hors d’oeuvres at 5:30!

#1.15) Because it’s free!

#1) Because you want to be equipped and edified in your faith, life and ministry!!!

Bearing Fruit: Ministry with Real Results
by Lovett H. Weems Jr. and Tom Berlin.
Abingdon Press, 2011

A Book Overview by Kwasi Kena

Want to find something that clergy and regular folks have in common? Put the words “name your fear” in a search engine, and you will find entries from writers struggling to find their writing voice, people trying to overcome self-conscious concerns about their appearance, and students worried about fitting in at school. Missing from the top of the list is the voice of clergy and laypersons in leadership in the church.

What concerns to church folks have? What keeps pastors up at night? In the introduction to Bearing Fruit: Ministry with Real Results authors Lovett Weems Jr. and Tom Berlin state “…as [pastors and highly committed laypersons] grow older, [they] carry a deep and imperative fear: that the ministry of the church will be fruitless in their generation.”

In local churches, conversations about bearing fruit can quickly turn into opportunities for pastors to boast “we’ve got 1,500 on the rolls.” More often the conversations give way to rationalizations: “I’m not called to effective, I am called to be faithful,” or “I am called to a ministry of presence,” and, “You have to understand where we are in our lifecycle as a congregation.” Juxtaposed to these comments is the parable of the barren fig tree—three years barren, spared for one more year for cultivation in hopes of bearing fruit (Luke 13:6-9).

With the precision of skilled surgeons, Weems and Berlin name not only the fears and objections to bearing fruit, but they also outline workable processes that can lead a congregation into fruitful ministry. As usual, one key to forward progress is strong leadership development.

Remember the Three “Cs”: Character, Competence, and Contribution

Weems, through The Lewis Center for Church Leadership, the director, studied the most common recurring expectations of clergy leadership. The study identified three descriptors of effectiveness: character, competence, and contribution. The first two categories, character of the leader and that leader’s competence in carrying out duties, are normally the only measures of faithful ministry. These two categories focus on who people are, what people do, and how people do a task. According to the authors, the third category, contribution, holds the most potential for generating more fruitful ministry. They urge clergy and lay leadership to focus on competence, i.e. what we accomplish.

Weems and Berlin describe contribution as a leader’s ability to work with a congregation “to discern God’s vision for them and [guide] the implementation of the vision so that the congregation bears fruit…” Unfortunately, the authors note that the job descriptions at the denominational level, in churches, and in schools pay “very little attention…to ‘what we accomplish.’”

Practical Solutions

A most impressive feature of this book is its practicality. Weems and Berlin help the reader discover how to repurpose common practices into methods for producing good fruit. Take evaluation, as an example. Change the function of ministry evaluation from mere reporting to leading the group into outcome-based results. For example, an evaluation of a choir retreat could merely list the number of people who attended, the repertoire decided upon for the Easter musical, and so on. Or the evaluation could help choir members clarify their roles in music ministry that support the overall mission of the church.

Key Questions

A recurring quote appears in Leading Ideas, an e-newsletter produced by The Lewis Center for Church Leadership: “Leaders do not need answers. Leaders must have the right questions.” This truism runs through each chapter. Questions lead to bottom-line answers. Ask the perpetual “why question” and begin your answer with the words “so that,” and you will quickly discover the ultimate aim and purpose of what you are doing.

Why do we worship? We worship so that…. The way your worship committee completes that sentence should underscore the mission of the local church. How does your worship help make disciples for the transformation of the world? By the time you include the musicians, ushers, and pastor, in the so that experience, you will begin to discover where you are bearing godly fruit and where you are not.

Vision

The last part of the book focuses on vision: the church’s vision for ministry and the leaders’ vision for ministry. Here you will find a break from the normal rhetoric that spouts the importance of the pastor “casting the vision” and getting the congregation to buy into it. Instead, the book emphasizes the reality that fruitful biblical vision is about discovering “the vision to which God is calling a people,” not the sole vision of the pastor. The leader’s role is to help the congregation take the next faithful step toward fulfillment of God’s vision for that church. This is a collective process.

Bearing Fruit is a breath of fresh air among so many books promoting cookie-cutter approaches to church growth. This is no formula-driven text. This is a practical read for both clergy and lay leadership that can actually guide a church out of stagnation into fruitful ministry. This is a book an entire church should both read and put into practice.