How should we define success in pastoral ministry?

This question begins a series of questions on the theme of pastoral ministry for this week. I am asking this particular question because sometimes we misunderstand success as we evaluate our ministry as pastors.

Here are some ways that we traditionally evaluate “success” in ministry?

1. Numbers – how many people are coming?
2. What are people tell us – comments after sermons, ministry events, etc.?
3. Length of pastoral ministry in a particular location?
4. Size of building?
5. Size of church budget?
6. Debt load?
7. Number of ministries?
8. Baptism and Membership numbers?

These are a sampling of ways we can define what “success” is in ministry. Any others that you can think of and the problems you can see with some or all of them?

Taken together, they are all important in overall evaluation but this traditional list is still lacking a dimension that we too easily ignore. This dimension is the subjective, less quantitative characteristics that are often neglected but are often what distinguishes healthy and successful churches. Therefore, I think we should evaluate our churches with the following questions (along side the traditional objective questions above)?

1. Do we have open arms that reflects the love for others that Jesus demonstrated?
2. Do we have good relationships among ourselves?
3. Do people know there spiritual gifts and are they using them?
4. Is it difficult to find and identify ministry leaders?
5. Do we have openness for disagreements and can we handle conflict with love and respect?
6. Do we, as a community, enjoy being together?
7. Does the average church member have good healthy relationships with people in the community who are unchurched?
8. Do our worship services have an element of excitement about them?
9. Do our pastors, elders and leadership get along and enjoy each other?
10. Do people participate in the worship service?
11. Does our budget reflect our values?
12. Do we know, and are we doing, something about the needs of our community?
13. Do we show a heart for missions and is it reflective in our actions?
14. Is laughter a common sound in our foyer, classrooms and sanctuary?
15. Is our teaching engaging, biblical, contextual, etc.
16. Are we compassionate to others? Do we mourn with those who mourn?
17. Are people’s lives being changed by the Spirit of God and do we, as a community, celebrate those changes.
18. If our church ceased to exist would our community notice? If not, why not?

I understand that these qualitative questions may seem idealistic and problematic, as they are difficult to track and report on, but don’t they reflect a deeper level of success than our traditional quantitative questions?

My recent “question series” of blog posts seems to be very well received. Thanks for reading and commenting (both through blog comments and via email). In fact, I would invite you to be a part of the question process further and let me know of some questions you would like me to ask. In fact, an email I received today with a suggested question has prompted a series of questions on pastoral ministry that I will pursue this coming week.

So, thanks for reading, commenting and emailing. I look forward to exploring these questions together with you. Your comments and emails are always welcomed and encouraged. In fact, if you would like and are so inclined, I invite you to take these questions to your own blog and develop your own thoughts further (however, for the sake of connected discussion, please place a comment on my post with a link to yours so there is a thread to the discussion).

Thanks again for reading.

Why do we, in the evangelical church, fear church tradition?

The reason this question was prompted by me this morning is that it so happens to be the Sunday of Epiphany and the evangelical church we attended had a vision Sunday with no mention of Epiphany. There is nothing wrong with a vision Sunday and similar services would have been held across North America. I guess I wonder why we don’t reach back into church tradition and remember some of the important dates on the church calender – dates the Church has celebrated for hundreds of years, such as the Sunday of Epiphany.

I remember preaching a couple of years ago on this particular Sunday and tackled the idea of Epiphany (preaching on the narrative of the Wisemen acknowledging Jesus as King). Most people in the church commented that had no idea that the Church has celebrated this date for over a thousand years now.

I am not saying that we need to be “traditional” and go back to some sort of ancient Latin service. However, maybe in our post-reformation theology (which rejects the authority of tradition, saying that our authority is in scripture alone – an important distinction), we have moved to0 far in this direction and have rejected tradition all together.

I actually think if we educated the typical evangelical on the Church calender, they would gain deeper meaning and insight. In fact, it may even help us slow down and reflect on the dates we do celebrate that too often seem to surprise us (such as Easter which has Ash Wednesday and Lent leading up to it).

There has to be more room for tradition and the acknowledgment that we, the Church, don’t stand in isolation as but are apart of the Church past, present and future.

Do we at times loose sight of the proverbial forest through the trees when we study theology?

As a theology student and pastor, I have to admit there are times when I can loose sight of the big picture and get lost in my search to understand a specific aspect of theology. Don’t get me wrong, it is vital to understand God and specific aspects of Him, but that should never replace our marveling and worshipping Him. Like a botonist who studies flowers and gets so caught up in one aspect of a flower, such as pollination, and forgets to smell the scent that pollen brings, we too can can get caught up in understanding God and forget to worship, marvel and know Him. The act of theology is vital and a privilege to do, but I don’t want to loose track of the forest for my study of the trees.

Today’s question is theological in nature. I am currently taking an independent study class on “The Person and Work of Christ” that has prompted me to think through numerous questions about Christ, thus, I thought I would ask the following question:

What is meant by the humanity of Jesus?

1. We say Jesus is fully human (and fully divine) but what does or doesn’t this refer to?
2. What is the essence of being human?
3. Is being human, the ability to sin?
4. Do you have to be born to be human (note: Adam wasn’t born)?
5. Is Jesus able to be fully human if he wasn’t female?
6. Was Jesus a master of all things (the best carpenter, mathematician, philosopher, teacher, orator, etc.) or is part of being human the inability to be the best of everything?
7. Does being human necessitate that there is limited knowledge or can Jesus be omniscient and still be human?

These are a few of the many questions I have been reflecting on. I am not going to give any answers here…I don’t have the time, energy or expertise to effectively do so, but thought the questions are worth considering.