Church in the Inventive Age -- Review

CHURCH IN THE INVENTIVE AGE. By Doug Pagitt. Minneapolis: Sparkhouse Press, 2010. 114 pages.

Whether we’re ready or not, we have entered the “inventive age,” so says Doug Pagitt, pastor of Solomon’s Porch in Minneapolis. Of course, other writers have suggested other names for this new age that we’ve entered. Consider that Harvey Cox has called this the Age of the Spirit,” and Phyllis Tickle speaks of the “Great Emergence.” Whatever you want to call it, the world is changing and we can embrace the changes, resist them, or adapt as best we can – sort of survive. Doug puts it this way:

We live in the midst of inescapable change. Maybe this thrills you. Maybe this scares you. Regardless, the changes happening right now in American society mean every cultural institution, every community, every individual has a choice to make: We can either be in on the change or we can be left behind. (p. 3).

The choice is rather stark, but real.

Church in the Inventive Age is a rather brief and even breezy book. As Doug notes early on the focus is on the big idea and not necessarily the details – like you’ll find in a book such as American Grace by Robert Putnam and David Campbell. The first three ages will be familiar to most readers – the Agrarian Age, the Industrial Age, and then the Information Age. There are churches that still exist, and may even thrive that represent each of these patterns, but even the information age is giving way to something new, something that will focus on collaboration and creativity. But, in focusing on the future and on change, Pagitt doesn’t want us to jettison the path, but rather to make sure we don’t get stuck in the past

So, what are the first three ages and how does the church exist in them? The first age is the Agrarian Age, and interestingly this was the age into which the American Republic was born. This was an age in which the people were dependent on the land and on each other. In this age the church was often structured around the parish – that is, it was geographically defined. You didn’t go looking for something different, at least not very often. Besides, most communities were mono-cultural, and churches were defined by those cultures. And for the most part the churches themselves, as buildings, were fairly simple structures. . And the dominant image of minister/church leader was that of pastor or shepherd, who was charged with caring for the flock. I’m assuming that this image is deeply ingrained in the psyche’s of many, even in this age of massive change.

The second age, the Industrial Age, emerged on the American scene in the 19th century, taking hold first in the north and then later making headway in the south. This is the age of urbanization and massive immigration. Here the farm is replaced by the factory as the primary social/cultural image. Instead of dependence the metaphor of the age might be that of repeatability – Henry Ford! The church of this age, as it tried to respond to the changes remained ethnically monocultural, even if the community itself was diverse. And the simple structures of the past gave way to what Pagitt refers to as “fortresses with smokestack-like steeples and red brick facades" (in his presentation at Theology after Google, Doug showed us a slide of the former Methodist Church that Solomon’s Porch took over that looks very much like the one in this metaphor). This is also the age in which denominations began to gain strength, and the pastor was called to teach the denomination’s theology, and so we shouldn’t be surprised to see the expansion of seminaries.

Finally we come to the Information Age. You may be wondering – isn’t that the age we’re in currently? Well, apparently not. This is the age of the suburb and the megachurch. With few exceptions, those who are by definition Caucasian can mix and be Americanized. Schools and Education are emphasized, and thus not only in the public field but Christian education has its hey day. Churches become learning centers, and the pastor is teacher/CEO. Of course in this era, bigger is better! Or is it?

The Information Age, which emerged just yesterday, or so it seems, has begun to lose its hold on the populace, which is increasingly disenchanted by the way things are going. It’s not that mega-churches are going away, but more and more people are looking for alternatives. In the Inventive Age the focus is on creativity in a context where the future remains unknown. There is a great lack of certainty, which makes long term planning difficult! This is the age of more dynamic forms of media, such as blogs and social media (Facebook and Twitter), which allows for much more creativity and collaboration across vast spaces in the world. Pagitt writes: “The Inventive Age is one in which inclusion, participation, collaboration, and beauty are essential values. The values of the previous age still exist, but in different, even subservient, roles” (p. 30). In this new age size might not matter all that much, with focus being placed on participation. The pastor, while still teaching, preaching, and leading, will put her or his focus on creating space for “open-source faith experiences.” That is, making a place for the people be spiritually creative.

If we’re to understand these different ages, we must understand what makes for culture and cultural change. Pagitt uses four images – head (thinking), heart (values), gut (aesthetics), and hands (tools). In each age these cultural components exist, but in different ways, and with different components having greater sway. What is true of previous ages is true of the Inventive Age, which must concern itself with each aspect of culture. And to survive in this age there must be collaboration between those who emphasize different aspects – and thus there is need for collaboration between evangelical and mainline (that word should get the attention of those in both camps that would rather not engage the other). So what must the church be doing in this new age? According to Pagitt, it must be engaged in remaking the culture. That is, even as we adapt to culture, we must be engaged in its creation – lest we be left behind.

So, what shall we do? That may depend on where we find ourselves – we have, according to Pagitt, three options. We can exist for, with or as the Inventive Age. To live for the Inventive Age is to take what we have and bring it to bear on and in the new age. As I read the book, I saw my own church in this position. We’re keeping alive an older – industrial age – model in many ways, but there is something valuable to bring to the table, even as the church makes room for new things. The key here is being authentic to yourself. I appreciated this word from Doug because some in the Emergent Movement give off the vibe that the older Mainline churches are essentially old hat. Doug seems, at least here, to give room for older traditional churches to play a significant role in the future.

Perhaps the most difficult situation to be in is to live with the Inventive Age. In essence this stature means being a church within a church. Many churches have tried to have both traditional and contemporary styles, though this doesn’t often work easily. But the point is finding ways to make room within the structure for younger generations. Success here requires being willing to walk alongside each other as equal partners and learn from each other. That requires incredible trust, which isn’t easy to build. It also means being loose with the furniture! I’ll leave that one to your imagination. And as Doug points out, “churches that do the ‘with’ relationship well often end up becoming separate congregations for all the right reasons” (p. 94).

Finally there is the church that lives “as the Inventive Age.” This is the church that’s being born now. It may be, like Doug’s one that lives within a building, or it could be one like Koinonia, a church launched and led by Kimberly Knight that exists in Second Life, a virtual reality. Such realities exist in what Doug calls “perpetual beta.” They’re always changing and adapting – much like Facebook, which never goes down completely, but recreates itself on the fly. It may be multilingual in that it brings together ancient and modern symbols and realities. It is an age of “coulds,” where the past is curated for service to the future and meaning is central. And its not simply creating meaningful spiritual experiences for the individual – so that the focus gets put on personal salvation. No, what the Inventives long for are “spiritual communities in which their faith matters – not only to them, but to the world around them” (p. 102). In this movement forward, there is no “target audience,” so don’t think this is just about 20-somethings!

So, what should we expect about the future church? We can’t really know all the particulars, we must be ready to adapt and grow with the changing times. Instead of using the metaphor of a road, Pagitt suggests that of flight. A road moves from one location to another, with flight the space is open. What we must do in setting the flight plan is account for the variables and risks that we will encounter, and then head out!

As I noted at the beginning of the review. This is a fast reading book that is big on big ideas and not on details. As a historian I could get picky on the time lines, but that’s not the point. Key here is getting the sense that our churches represent different ages, and that all four ages are existing simultaneously. It’s also key to know that the faith structures of the past ages aren’t bad or wrong, but they don’t work for everyone, including a growing number of younger people. There are other places to go for deeper analysis, but what I find useful here is that it can open us up to a conversation about the world that we inhabit and the tools and experiences that we all bring to the conversation. Pick up and read Church in the Inventive Age and begin the conversation.

America's Religious Identity -- Boom, Shocks, and After-shocks (Part 1)

The 1950s saw one of the largest booms in religiosity that Americans have ever witnessed.  All you had to do was open the doors and the churches were full.  Liberal and conservative, Mainline, Catholic, Evangelical -- everyone was doing well.  And the key to success, interestingly enough, were the men returning home from the War.  Yes, it was the returning GI's and their wives, the so-called "Greatest Generation" that fueled this incredible spike in religious (and civic) involvement.   Robert Putnam and Dennis Campbell lay out this scenario in American Grace.

[T]he distinguishing features of the men now accompanying their wives to church were that they were mostly young fathers, mostly veterans, and mostly college-educated.  The postwar boom in church going was fueled above all by men who had survived the Great Depression as teenagers and World War II as grunts, and were now ready at last to settle into a normal life, with a steady job, a growing family, a new house, and a car, and respectable middle-class status.  Church going was an important emblem of that respectability. (American Grace, pp. 85-86).

Thus, between 1940 and 1960 church membership climbed from about 49% of the population to 69%.  My parents were part of this generation -- well, my father was in the war, my mother was still in her mid-teens when the war ended and the Baby Boom began.   During this period Mainline churches were out front, the bastions of religious respectability.  I remember growing up in the late 1960s and early 1970s in Klamath Falls, Oregon, and our Episcopal Church was full of families.  The Disciples of Christ, like many denominations, purchased land in new subdivisions and planted churches there, expecting them to boom.  Consider that, according to the authors, between 1945 and 1960, in inflation-adjusted dollars, church construction went up from about $26 million to $615 million dollars.  As the construction of churches expanded, people did come, at least for a time, but then as the 1960s set in things began to change.  A new generation came of age and they were looking for something else besides religious respectability.  But more about this "shock" generation in Part 2. 

What needs to be noted here is that this generation of joiners and builders, the men and women who provided the backbone for our religious institutions and "peopled" our churches with children, are passing from the scene, and they are being replaced by generations much less interested in sustaining religious institutions.  [To be continued]

Managing Polarities in Congregations -- A Review

MANAGING POLARITIES IN CONGREGATIONS: Eight Keys for Thriving Faith Communities. By Roy M. Oswald and Barry Johnson. Herndon, VA: Alban Institute, 2010. 251 pages.

It is a rare thing to run into a congregation that doesn’t want to thrive. Yes, there are faith communities that seem satisfied with the status quo, but that’s because the status quo is how they define what it means to be thriving. So, leaving aside those church folks satisfied with simply existing, most church leaders want to know how their congregations can grow in faith, in numbers, and in ministry. In our desire to reach this goal, many of us have run from one promising product to the next. We read about six easy steps to church growth and try each of them, hoping that something sticks. If we read that young people like contemporary music we may be inclined to toss the organ and hire a praise band. Perhaps the key to vitality isn’t flitting from one promised cure to another, but instead involves attending to and managing the polarities that are present in every community of faith? That is the premise of the new book by Roy Oswald, an ELCA pastor, church consultant, and author of several Alban published books, and Barry Johnson, President of Polarity Management Associates.

Oswald and Johnson use polarity maps, a concept that dates back to the mid 1970s to lay out principles by which congregations can discern a path to vitality. The idea here is that there are naturally occurring polarities, two seemingly opposite but interdependent pairs that must be managed properly. This is because they are “unavoidable, unsolvable and indestructible” (p. 209). They are, like a GPS, which when we make wrong turns, simply recalculate and offer an alternate route.

The polarity maps assume that there are two poles, around which energy flows in an “infinity loop.” To get a sense of how this works, think of breathing – we inhale and exhale, continually, as long as we live. The same is true for congregations, as long as they live, they will engage these polarities. They can choose to manage them poorly or well, and the manner in which they manage them will determine congregational vitality.

• Tradition AND Innovation:  Another way of naming this pair is "stability AND change," that is, finding a balance between honoring the past and being relevant to the present situation.
• Spiritual health AND Institutional Health:  This is a key issue in most congregations -- do we focus on the spiritual, the mission, or the institutional life?   Again, it's not an either or situation.
• Management AND Leadership:  Management is about maintenance, leadership is about vision.  Vitality, requires both attending to the institutional life (management) and guiding the community into an embrace of its mission (leadership).
• Strong Clergy Leadership AND Strong Lay Leadership:  Here the issue is shared leadership, instead of competition for power.  Thriving congregations need strong pastors, and yet they also need lay leaders who are willing to work together to achieve the mission of the church. 
• Inreach AND Outreach:  This is again an area that easily lends itself to competition.  Do we focus on meeting the needs of the members or do we reach out to those beyond the congregation's walls -- both in terms of evangelism and social justice.  Is the church a chaplaincy or a mission station?  Or, do we need to make sure that both poles are managed well? 
• Nurture AND Transformation:   We might call this -- loving people as they are AND helping them become who God would have them be.  It is a polarity of focusing on pastoral care and discipleship.
• Making Disciples– Easy Process AND Challenging Process:  Here the focus is on the manner in which discipleship takes place.  The authors recommend two ways for persons to become members of the church, recognizing that the process of discipleship might need to come prior to membership for some, while for others the process might better take place as they are members already.  Either way, the goal is the same.
• Call AND Duty.  How are we motivated to serve?  Is it a call or is it a duty?  On one hand the question is answered by attending to those things that emerge from our basic values, and at the other end attending to those things we feel a definite call to engage in.  On one hand there is the sense of making use of one's gifts, at the other side, recognizing that there are certain things to be done as a Christian. 

As one looks at the eight polarities, it is easy to see how easily it can be for churches to focus on one over the other, as if these are either/or premises. The authors write that “the more people value the upside of one pole, the more they will denigrate the opposite pole by pointing out why it is a bad idea and adding more items to the downside of the pole” (p. 37). The reality is that there are both upsides and downside to each pole. We make a mistake if we assume that one or the other pole is a problem to be solved, rather than a reality of life that must be managed. Thus, by emphasizing one over the other, which often is the tendency of church leaders, we’re more likely to fall prey to the downside of the pole we’re embracing, and this leads to decline. For instance, because institutional survival seems to always trump religious experience, there is the tendency to focus on those things that contribute to survival. Thus, there is the danger for churches that are struggling with survival to focus on inreach over outreach, but as the authors note, “congregations need to remind themselves continually of their primary mission.” Although the spiritual nurture of members is part of the mission of the church, surely the church is also called to evangelism and social justice. Vitality requires that this polarity be managed well.

In eight of the nine chapters the authors lay out the dynamics of the eight polarities, offering insight into both the upside and downside of each pole, show the ways in which the polarities can be managed poorly, offering a guide to early warnings, and also offering guidelines to managing the polarities well. Accompanying each of these chapters is a polarity map so that the reader can get a visual sense of how this works.

This book should prove invaluable to churches and church leaders who seek to move beyond the either/or thinking that so dominates on our communities of faith. By recognizing, as these authors do, that these polarities are naturally occurring and thus a gift from God, we need to receive them accordingly, and seek the proper balance that leads to thriving congregations. This is, therefore, a must read book for all clergy and lay church leaders.

Social Justice and the Korean Church

The story of the Korean church is simply amazing.  At the turn of the 20th Century the church in Korea barely registered.  Today, in South Korea the Christian population stands at about 30%, which is simply amazing.  So, what is the explanation for such amazing growth?

The answer to this question may prove surprising.  According to a piece in the Christian Century written by Philip Jenkins, one of the most balanced observers of global Christianity, part of the answer can be found in the fact that Christians were at the forefront of social justice during turbulent times -- this goes for both Catholic and Protestant expressions.  Despite its missteps and scandals, the church has proven itself to be a community of faith committed to the welfare of the people of the nation.  Jenkins writes:

But Christians had some advantages. Above all, they could begin with a blank slate in a nation with minimal exposure to the faith before the 18th century. Christians therefore had no burden of history or prejudice to overcome and were able to establish their credentials among the Korean people. From the earliest days, Christians associated themselves wholeheartedly with the cause of the nation and people, in an age when thuggish Japanese imperialists were seeking to destroy that identity. Europeans might draw comparisons to the role of Catholicism as the symbol of national resistance in Ireland and Poland. When activists signed a Korean Declaration of Independence in 1919, almost half were Christian, though at that time Christians were just 1 percent of the population.

Korea is a nation cursed by having too much history and too many conflicts and disasters—yet each crisis served to strengthen the force of Christianity on the peninsula. Prior to the 1940s, the city of Pyongyang was a great Christian center. In the face of communist persecution, hundreds of thousands fled to the south, where over time they greatly flourished. The Korean War itself contributed to the Christian cause, as the churches were principal channels of relief efforts. Christians, it seemed, were not only loyal patriots but generous supporters of the poor and oppressed. Being Christian in no way compromised a hard-won national identity.

As I write this, I'm also reading the new biography of Dietrich Bonhoeffer written by Ferdinand Schlingensiepen, which tells the story of a man who understood that Jesus had more to do with life than simply save our souls.  Christian faith, for Bonhoeffer, as it appears to be true of the Korean Church, requires a commitment to the welfare one's neighbors.   Therefore, it would appear that a commitment to social justice is no barrier to the growth of the church

I've Got Nothing against Counting Heads, But . . . !

In my review of Jason Byassee's new book on the Small Church, a book I enjoyed in part because I've been a small church pastor, I took strong issue with the afterword written by William Willimon.  I didn't take issue with Willimon because of his recent emphasis on numbers and church growth, an emphasis that seems somewhat at odds with his earlier books written with Stanley Hauerwas.  Heck, I have no problem with numbers and counting.  Although I pastor a relatively small church, I want to see it grow.  Numbers can be a sign of health -- though if numbers are the focus, then we often do whatever is necessary to market ourselves so we can get people in the door.  No, I didn't take issue with the numbers issue, I took issue with the  snarky tone he took toward small churches, suggesting that small churches were communities only Jesus could love. 

In an email conversation with Jason after I posted the review, he pointed me to his own response to the question of numbers and counting, that he had offered in a piece he had originally posted at Willimon's blog --and now at the Duke Divinity School's Call and Response blog.  In this piece he notes that hlike many  theologians he had taken a negative attitude toward head counting as a means of determining faithfulness to the gospel. 

He writes:

I confess I can’t find a Methodist argument against Willimon’s claim that Wesley insisted on numerical measures as a plumbline of effectiveness. Amidst the spasms of bile heaped on Willimon in this blogstorm (see link and link), no one has been able to show a Wesleyan argument against Willimon’s claim that numerical growth is a mark of Methodist faithfulness. They’ve attacked him personally, or attacked adherence to Wesley, or suggested bishops be held to the same standard (agreed -- and so would Will), or offered red herrings (“What about the poor?” As if anyone is asking only for new rich members) or just whined and kvetched. But they haven’t overturned his claim that numbers mattered to Wesley and their upward trend is a sign of church health.

As an elder in the UMC this makes me quite nervous. I miss being a local pastor enough that a day doesn’t pass when I don’t think about it. And I don’t much like the idea of my future hinging on whether the church I serve grows.

The worry that Willimon has is whether the church is on such a downward cycle that soon there won't be a church.  Now, I'm not as pessimistic as Willimon seems to be, but then I'm a local pastor and not a judicatory.  But, the debate over numbers does raise the question of how we diagnose health in a church.  Does size matter?  The most recent issue of The Christian Century, which just landed on my doorstep features as its cover story an article on the trend toward bigger churches.  Most churches are small, but growing 50% of Americans attend churches over 350 people, with 9% attending mega churches. While a majority of megachurches remain connected to denominations, most of these churches look and feel like independent congregations -- their links being fairly loose.

For good or bad, according to the article written by John Dart, this trend has changed the face of the church.  Even smaller churches face the reality that people come to the church looking for the opportunities found in megachurches.   That is the point made in the followup article written by Kyle Childress entitled "Oversized Expectations."  In this article he notes how people come to the church with expectations forged by megachurches, expectations that even impact long term members.  He notes that his Baptist church in Nacogdoches, Texas is one of the few without screens and praise bands.  The article opens with a description of visitors who seemed rather uncomfortable in the service.  Recounting a conversation that occured afterward, he notes that one of the persons blurted out:  "Well, we noticed you use hymnbooks.  We've never been in a church that still uses hymnbooks.  We've always had the words on overhead screens." (CC, July 27, 2010, p. 28).  Childress goes on to recount another conversation with a young couple who had visited.  In a conversation that occurred during a visit to the couple, they people told him that while they liked the church and the people, especially the emphasis on the environment that the church had, but in their estimation:  "a person has to work to hard to be a member of your church. We don't have time to work that hard."   Childress notes that this is part of the issue, the bigger the church the less one must do to be part of the congregation.  In a small church it's always "all hands on deck."  

So, the question is:  how do we determine congregational health and faithfulness?  Although I have pastored smaller congregations, I must ask myself -- would I join one if I were to be without church employment?  What are your thoughts?

Decline in the Megachurches

It's not nice to take joy in the problems of others.  Thus, as a small church pastor, I shouldn't jump for joy to learn that megachurches, the leaders of whom sometimes look down upon our little ventures, are having troubles.  So I shall not do so.  Indeed, as the pastor of a congregation that was in its own day a mega-church, I understand the dynamics of the rise and fall of such entities.  Martin Marty doesn't rejoice either, but he reflects upon these problems facing churches that struggle to be relevant and adapt due in part to their size.  

Are we seeing the return of the "small is beautiful" ideal?  Who knows, but we can reflect on what is happening in our context.  So, take a read, offer your thoughts.  

*****************************************
Sightings 6/7/10

Decline in the Megachurches

-- Martin E. Marty

Schadenfreude, or rejoicing in others’ misfortunes, is abundantly evident in responses, blogged and otherwise, to the bad/sad news about the decline of the famed Crystal Cathedral, a megachurch founded in the mid-1950s in California. Publicity has been constant, for over a year, concerning the church’s 55-million-dollar debt, sellings-off of property, non-payment of bills, et cetera. Other megachurches have closed when the nearby malls on whose traffic they half-depended went broke. In other cases, staff firings draw attention and sympathy. Still others are driven to hold special fund drives to make up for financial declines in the current crisis. Not only mega-places have had to do that, but do setbacks in the stories of super-successful churches add up to anything particular?

First, why Schadenfreude? One has to see a turnabout-is-fair-play attitude in some of the uncharitable responses. The megachurch networks build constituencies in part by attacking denominations, even as these networks then become more-than-virtual, indeed, parallel and competitive “denominations” themselves. Worshippers who gather in town-and-country, inner-city, and left-behind neighborhoods, where neither congregations nor anything else can grow, chafe when the mega-success folk deride them, publishing books and releasing releases which suggest that smaller, declining, or holding-their-own churches and synagogues are simply doing wrong, or at least not doing right.

Through the years I’ve been careful about criticizing such churches. We were all trained to keep a critical eye on denominations, Protestant and Catholic, in what is now written off as “the mainstream.” Along the way I learned not to be hyper-critical. The morning after even a mild half-sentence of criticism appears on TV or in print, the public relations people of the powerful churches are at the critic’s door. And, let it be said, the other half-sentence often expresses positive views of what such churches achieve. First, they are by no means all alike, and many could pass most critical tests. Second, they do reach and serve people who would otherwise not be reached. Third, many are responsive to criticism. And hundreds of them nurture small groups that provide opportunities for theological probing and equip for servant-leadership. Why knock that?

Back to the issue: What is going on with the decline of the megachurches? I’ve read some sociological analyses, works in progress on which we’ll report after they are published, which have some big clues. Most come down to the fact that so many of these churches replace or eclipse classic concerns such as “repentance” and “redemption” and have converted, in their terms and substance and energies, to market models. One organizes strategies, methods, and messages to adapt to such models and offer what the market at its best can offer. But we are learning these years that markets have limits, as do churches which are too adapted to them. When a charismatic pastoral-founder is moved from the scene, when success does not always follow those in the minority of megachurches that over-promise success, when cultural tastes change, down go the fortunes of the market-churches.

No, the megachurches are not going to disappear. But as they transition from the world of inevitable success to re-participation in a world of partial success, setbacks, disappointments, and frustrations, now is a good time to see what about them can be appropriate in the lives of so many other kinds of churches and synagogues, which have much to learn, and only sometimes are themselves eager to change. All kinds of religious institutions are in this – whatever this is – together. Forget the Schadenfreude.

For more information:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan/30/local/la-me-crystal-cathedral30-2010jan30

http://crystal-cathedral-news.newslib.com/story/2974-3226431/

Martin E. Marty's biography, current projects, publications, and contact information can be found at http://www.illuminos.com./



----------

This month's Religion and Culture Web Forum features a chapter from literary critic Amy Hungerford's forthcoming volume Postmodern Belief: American Literature and Religion Since 1960 (Princeton University Press, August, 2010). In "The Literary Practice of Belief," Hungerford focuses upon two contemporary literary examples--the novels of Marilynne Robinson and the Left Behind series--in order "to engage (and revise) the current emphasis on practice over belief in our understanding of religion." With invited responses from Thomas J. Ferraro (Duke University), Amy Frykholm (The Christian Century), Constance Furey (Indiana University), Jeffrey J. Kripal (Rice University), Caleb J. D. Maskell (Princeton University), Edward Mendelson (Columbia University), Richard A. Rosengarten (University of Chicago Divinity School), and Glenn W. Shuck (Williams College).  

  http://divinity.uchicago.edu/martycenter/publications/webforum/index.shtml

----------

Sightings comes from the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School.