I always wrestle with this too, Josh. I have often said, to our Young Adults, “Why don’t we have a church meeting, read the Sermon on the Mount, and ask ourselves how well we are doing at fully embodying this call to be an alternative society? Are we a visible witness to peacemaking? Are we doing our acts of justice in holy ways? Is life here an experience of exclusion or embrace?” What if we had a gathering like that?

Is there a sensitive way to measure diversity?

Is there a way to look at how OCers are progressing from “product-users” to “product-sharers”?

Is there a way to measure actual effectiveness? (sort of a “how well do you sleep at night after looking over OC’s commitments in light of the Jesus story?”)

As I’m sure you’re aware, attendance can be a tricky way to measure effectiveness, for several reasons: the tenuous relationship between popularity and effectiveness, the danger that too any attendees can suggest that the message isn’t making enough people uncomfortable, the idea that the OC environment cannot possibly enable all people to worship in their authentic heart-style.

What are the visible signs of the kingdom of God? Are they actually measurable at all?

Persecution, maybe?

It seems pretty clear from Jesus words that if were doing our job, the principalities and powers aren’t gonna like it.

Maybe our effectiveness should be measured by our prophetic witness, who we stand with, not what we stand for. Calling out the powers and thier injustice, while simultaneously stepping in to right the wrongs… Even if that means being slandered as “drunks and gluttons”.

I, and I’m sure you, have experience with the local secuirty forces looking with suspicion because you are hanging out with the wrong folks. I gave a friend (who has a history of prostitution and drug use) a ride one day and was followed by the vice squad until I parked, and they searched my vehicle. They also have made it known that I houldnt let “those people” inside my house… And they all knew that at that time I was on staff at a church.

Maybe this Haiti thing would be a good time to not only raise money and awareness of the suffering there… But also raise awareness of the imperialist tendencies of western democracies and it’s involvement in haitis plight, and other poor nations overwhelmed by high interest sovereign debt.

Btw, I think oc is doing a wonderful job at these things, and taking little steps is important. Just kinda shooting from the hip here

Do you preach the gospel and make disciples?

Somewhere I had a listing of signs that Randy Harris gave of signs of a healthy church. I can’t remember them all, but it had stuff in it like “Greater Hospitality to people in a social strata below ours,” “fewer numbers of people in the worship services because those times are being filled with serving others.”

I wish I could find them.

I think if we are going to try to objectively measure spiritual success or effectiveness, we’d need to be able to see our efforts in helping the poor, the orphans and the widows. We’d need to be able to measure how well our members were “keeping themselves undefiled by the world.” How do we do THAT in a humble way??? “Less than 2% of our members have engaged in sexual immorality in the past year. Only 10% of our members saw an R-rated movie in the past month. Etc?”

When James gave us the succinct description of pure religion, he failed to give us the measuring sticks. Do we help all widows and orphans in need or just those in our neighborhood? How does “undefiled” get fleshed out in our society? How far do we take accountability in measuring this? How do we rely on grace and continue to keep accurate, objective measurements?

Perhaps, it’s best to look at “willingness” more than hard data. Are we willing to send money to help people Haiti, even though we may not doctrinally agree with those who will deliver the goods needed? How well do we welcome the poor, homeless, fatherless, and even godless into our worship services? Do we go into the neighborhoods or expect people to flock to our buildings? And… on the last question, which means more to us to accomplish?

Didn’t come up with answers, but hey, Jesus answered questions with questions ;-)

Josh, I continue to be fascinated by the wave happening right now among healthy churches, the wave of being externally focused. A great and free place to get resources for this is here:

http://www.leadnet.org/LC_ExternallyFocusedChurches.asp

subscribe for free and go to downloads; there you will find a number of papers with examples, ideas, and resources to show what happening in churches that are discipling.

My intitial reaction is why are we so conerned about measuring such things? To congratulate ourselves? To justify ourselves before God? To make sure we are on track in some way?

Also, so much of what happens in the kingdom appears to be failure and setback (Justin may be on to something), so “effectiveness” probably needs to be defined. Can a shrinking church be “effective”? Can a “dull” church be “effective”?

Okay, having said that, what might be indicators of faithfulness to the gospel? As Phil notes, are the poor and hurting welcome among us, not just in theory but in practice? Are decisions made through prayerful consideration and community discernment on simply on the basis of what is (a) practical or (b) will keep the most people happy? Does the God who is preached and encountered in worship simply comfort us or does He also confront us? Are we becoming more or less sacrificial?

These are just quick thoughts off the top off my head.

Have had this conversation with a few friends and their churches trying to come up with a measurement of some sorts and this is a hard question.

Yes. The church should have vision and focus that unites the body around a central theme.

However, what is the measurement for growth?

Orphans and Widows come to mind.

Isaiah 58 come to mind.

Making disciples.

Relationships…needs to be the standard of measurement.

That is a tough one to measure but it is also a question that has been on my mind for the local church. I think such an assesment would start by asking if Otter Creek Church (or any church) ceased to exist, who would feel its loss the most? Its members or the surrounding community? Or Both? Also, start asking people in the community (especially those among the poor) who have no committment to OCC as to what they think.

These were some of the things I learned from talking with Brian Mavis who is the Minister of Community Involvement at the Lifebridge Christian Church in Longmont, CO…a church that has made great strides towards being eternally focused.

Grace and peace,

Rex

Josh,

I hesitate to comment because I would hate for you to read my take as a judgment. But I think it adds to the discussion.

Jesus said, basically, if you seek your life you’ll lose it and if you lose your life you’ll find it: one of the many inverted, head-scratching realities of Kingdom life. I believe this applies to your question.

Here’s how. Is it not possible that the desire to measure results and effectiveness is a way to seek life or, at least, have it affirmed? Again, this is born out of my own struggle with this question and is not intended as an indictment of your question.

I appreciate the functionality of calculating measurable and tangible results for churches, but I wonder if it’s not another adventure in missing the point. Jesus has asked us to lose our lives not seek them. So, one could say, how do we measure the loss of our lives in the work of God? But again, that takes us back around to seeking it again. This is the struggle: if we lose our lives to find it we will lose it. We simply lose our lives, period, which would seem to eliminate the need for any measurement of effectiveness because as we lose ourselves his effective ministry takes control.

I don’t know. Engage with my thoughts. There is probably something I’m not considering.

I don’t know a hard and fast way to measure it, but I would say obedience…

Sorry I’ve been slow to respond, busy, busy day. I appreciate the passion and conviction of those who’ve commented. Lots to say/write. Will do so soon.

JG

A few thoughts.

1. I think it’s healthy and good to ask practical questions about effectiveness. Colleges, universities, families, schools–any organized group of people do so. If the motive is pure, I don’t see a problem with. Perhaps I read too much into a few comments but I don’t like using texts from the gospel accounts to try and eliminate the responsibility of stewardship church leaders possess with the time, money, and talents we’ve been entrusted with.

2. I think the metrics should be shaped by the gospel narrative as a whole (”discipleship” is the key). What’s the narrative trajectory of The Story as it collides with our story? This is where Yoder, Lee Camp (for Stone-Campbell folks), et al are helpful. If the church is a distinct community, the church will only be distinct by paying careful attention to the practices of the community.

3. I agree that any form of measurement will fall short for the work of the kingdom is often invisible, unglamorous, difficult to detect. I fully acknowledge this.

4. I think it is helpful to reimagine what word Jesus might use for “kingdom” were Jesus to incarnate in our time and our place. Kingdom doesn’t carry the same punch. I don’t want to lose the word, just bring it in the contemporary arena. Many authors are doing this in helpful ways.

Josh (L)–I think you raise a good point but I’m not sure that’s what that text is really about. How do you know if you’ve lost it? Reflection is what I’m after. Thanks for pushing the conversation ahead.

Rex–thanks for the local example. I’ll look them up.

Phillip–this isn’t about self-glory, it’s about honest evaluation, truth-telling.

Many of you noted the “otherness” of the gospel. That is, the real test of the gospel’s power is in it’s ability to bring life to all creation/humanity (Kwame Bediako). We can never go wrong in giving ourselves for the sake of others–whatever practical form that takes.

Acts 2 shares a bit of insight on the effectiveness of the local church and how they lived the Jesus story. 44″And all who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 and they sold their possiessions and goods and distributed them to all, as any had need. 46And day by day, attending the temple together, and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts,47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.”

As one who looks at your church community from the outside, I have no idea what it’s like on the inside, but I am being blessed by one of your members and I sense by this blog, you, Joshua, and those who comment have a desire to walk the Jesus story.

Personally, I believe when we see the church communities truly take care of their own first…and live in a way that reflects the Father’s love, and truly walks in love, we won’t have to ask this question. But sadly, after 2000 years we’re still trying to build our own kingdoms (even within the members of the church) to show how effective we are.

Josh,

Good question. And good discussion. Now I have to think about this more. I’ve thought about my initial reactions to churches I hear about. And…

I’ve always had a sense that the effective churches are those who have a lot of stories to tell.

“‘I know your works. You have the reputation of being alive, but you are dead. Wake up, and strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have not found your works complete in the sight of my God. Remember, then, what you received and heard. Keep it, and repent.’”
(Revelation 3:1b-3a)

This is just a sampling of what Jesus had to say to a real, historical church in Asia Minor (Turkey). We can use Jesus’ words to these churches to assist us in examining our own.

Like Paul, we still struggle with our sin nature (see Romans), so neither we nor our churches will be perfect until Jesus returns. At the same time, we can live joyfully knowing that if we repent and trust Jesus (and him only) to rescue us from God’s wrath at our sin, then we are saved and covered by his grace.

Josh (L)–now that is a great definition–that sounds a lot like Acts. Good thought.

Rjohns–as always, I appreciate your comments. There are several other churches mentioned in Revelation. Some are praised, some are challenged. Do you see any of the other churches relating more to the American church than others? Is that too broad?

Barry-somehow I missed your comment. Thanks for sharing those thoughts. Welcome.

This is a good discussion.

Like some others, I have my reservations about use of the word “effectiveness” in this context. Mostly it is just important to consider at length what we mean when we employ it, lest we make the mistake of employing it as it is used most typically in Western culture (i.e., the “bottom line”, numbers, financial contribution, etc). Maybe ‘affective’ would be better, as it’s a more active word with fewer of the over-and-done-with connotations of ‘effects’. Because becoming Christians, disciples, etc. is always a process. The journey itself is inherent to discipleship, not just an end goal.

I also might add that engaged, tireless, critical self-reflection on this topic (how well are we enacting the gospel?) is a good sign of a healthy church. Without it, life is most likely draining–if it’s present at all.

To take it even further, the sign of an unhealthy church may be one that considers itself to ‘have arrived’.

I also agree with Marva Dawn when she argues that one sign of a church that is dangerously entertaining the powers that be is a church that is obsessed with its own (numerical) growth and self-perpetuation. On that note, I also value the ‘diasporic’ or ‘dispossesive’ way of thinking about church–ever journeying, ever a process of gathering, never institutionally at home in the world–and as such, more able to identify and find life with those on the margins (Christ–Matt.25).

But I don’t necessarily think that this model of church is mutually exclusive with good stewardship. I just think it would look somewhat different than our typical business-model of church.

Josh,

Check out Rick Rusaw and Eric Swanson, “The Externally Focused Church,” Group, 2002. I am not always quick to recommend books that appear to have a 1-2-3 approach to becoming a better church but this book is worth a look and this was some of the things I discussed with Brian Mavis.

Grace and peace,

Rex

Josh,

When I read Jesus’ words to the Asian churches in Revelation, I can’t truly tie one of them to the American church more than the others.

With only a superficial reading, the Laodicean church seems to resemble many American churches. However, when I read the other messages closely, I see their criticisms applying equally.

And yes, it is a broad question, because what is the “American church?”