Beyond the Ordinary

Of Denominations, Associations, and Orders

By Deborah Bruce

We’re located in the offices of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). There’s been much talk here about a new Reformed body that was born last week—the Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians.  Some congregations affiliated with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) may choose to join this new body either in addition to or instead of belonging to the PC(USA).

How common is belonging to a denomination or association of congregations? Very! Nine in ten congregations report affiliation with a denomination, convention, or similar kind of association.  Of the three faith groups, somewhat fewer conservative Protestant churches have such an affiliation.

Learn more. The Association of Religion Data Archives provides family trees for most major denominational families. These show mergers and splits over the years.

Where will this new body fit in the Presbyterian family tree? Only time will tell.

Money Trumps the Bible

By Deborah Bruce

I just reviewed 2011 Google Analytics results for this blog, and guess what—more readers view posts about money than those about the Bible!

Which posts have been most popular? In the past year, we’ve posted on everything from opinions about guns to embracing your inner failure; from views of God to views of women clergy. Which were most popular? Posts about financial giving. Three of the four most frequently viewed posts—including the single most viewed one—deal with the offering plate: 

1. Where does the money come from?
2. What is the Bible?  
3. Worshiper values make a difference for mainline Protestants
4. Secrets to a full collection plate, part 2  

1. And posts about the Bible? That one’s in second place!

What search terms bring people to our blog? Here are the top four:

1. Sermon length (and similar terms)  
2. Interfaith activities
3. Spiritual resolutions
4. Clergy support groups

1. What have we learned? We’re data junkies, so it shouldn’t be surprising that we find Google Analytics fascinating. But these results also give us a road map for the future. Given our readers’ clear interests, we’ll continue to post about the finances of U.S. congregations. But we won’t neglect the Bible.

What are your interests? If there’s something specific you’re interested in, let us know. Send your suggestions to uscongregations@pcusa.org. Also remember that we post about a range of other findings on our website.

And if you haven’t already read our best-sellers, click on those links above and catch up with our other readers.

 

 

The Missing Multiracial Congregation

By Joelle Kopacz

On January 16, we celebrate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a visionary leader who promoted racial integration and reconciliation. A pastor himself, Dr. King commented on the ironic and discouraging lack of diversity in churches in 1963: “At 11:00 on Sunday morning when we stand and sing and Christ has no east or west, we stand at the most segregated hour in this nation.”

Data from the U.S. Congregational Life Survey indicates that a vast majority of congregations still lack much racial and ethnic diversity. We consider congregations to be racially-ethnically diverse if they have 80% or fewer worshipers in any one racial-ethnic category. In 2001, 9% of congregations participating in the survey modeled diversity, with no significant change by 2008/2009 (7%).

Although there is still much to be done before U.S. congregations achieve greater racial-ethnic unity, many worshipers and congregations are striving to make this hope a reality. Visit these links for ideas and information about multicultural ministry:

• An article on Gerardo Marti, a sociologist who has studied multicultural congregations.
• A list of resources for multicultural ministry from blogger DJ Chuang.
• A review of Jacqueline Lewis’s book, The Power of Stories: A Guide for Leading Multi-Racial and Multi-Cultural Congregations.

 

A Look at the Venue: Where do congregations hold their religious services?

By Cynthia Woolever

At least nine out of ten congregations answer this question with “a church building owned by the congregation.” However, other congregations gather for worship in a variety of venues—schools, public libraries, movie theaters, retail spaces or store fronts, hotels, restaurants, and private homes.[1] In national studies dating back to 2000, researchers find the percentage of congregations meeting in non-traditional settings ranges from 4% to 10%.[2]

While congregations that meet in places other than a traditional church, mosque, or temple are clearly in the minority, their numbers are not insignificant. If 10% of the 350,000 U.S. congregations meet in non-traditional settings, that translates into 35,000 congregations nationally. And that means an average of 700 alternative worshiping sites in each state (if they were evenly distributed).[3] 

A recent article in The New York Times about the use of schools for religious services estimates that some 160 congregations in New York City use school buildings for worship services in this school year alone. 

The positives of meeting in non-traditional venues

Cost savings. In addition to no mortgage payment, these congregations do not have to worry about the costs of building maintenance, security, or capital improvements. They can spend more on church ministries. The FACT 2010 report revealed that congregations spend on average 20% of their budget on building and operation expenses. (This percentage represents a drop from 27% reported by congregations in the FACT 2008 report.) Congregations without their own facilities can use these funds for their ministries instead.   

Quick start for new churches. “Instant” or “pop-up churches” enable a small group of people to start a new congregation without their own building or meeting space. Acquiring land and building on any site can take several years. Without the commitment of a mortgage, new churches can throw more funds toward developing programs and hiring staff for the new ministry.  

A job for every volunteer. Using a public school or other venue involves transforming the space into a place of worship every week. Sometimes called “church in a box,” this strategy requires many people to move and set up chairs, tables, sound and projection equipment, and other items to accommodate the worship service. And, then, take it down again after the service. Some leaders describe this experience as an opportunity to involve a larger group of volunteers and to build community as many pitch in week after week.

The negatives of meeting in non-traditional venues

An obstacle for some visitors. Ed Stetzer, LifeWay Research, examined whether people prefer attending worship services in a traditional church building.[4] One-quarter would avoid non-traditional venues. But the majority (three out of four people) say it does not make any difference to them. This is a surprising finding because church growth advisors long believed that you could not grow a church without a building. More recently, some experts suggest that growing a new church would be easier if visitors could come to neutral territory—in other words, not a traditional church building. The research does not support either theory.

However, Stetzer’s research revealed that holiday churchgoers (those who attend on Easter and Christmas only) strongly prefer traditional locations to non-traditional ones. Catholics, more than other worshipers, also express a preference for church settings. Other national research supports his finding by documenting that non-traditional locations are more common among theologically conservative churches and non-Christian congregations.[5]    

Legal battles. Congregations worshiping in schools or other publicly funded locations (for example, libraries) may face legal complications. In many school districts, religious organizations are permitted to use public schools for worship services. However, a New York City regulation bans the practice. After a lengthy legal battle, a Bronx evangelical church eventually lost when the Supreme Court refused to review a lower-court decision that supported the city ordinance prohibiting use of public schools for worship. Some church lawyers were surprised by this decision, given that the court has ruled multiple times to protect religious worship the same as secular speech. The contradictory arguments for separation of church and state and those honoring worshipers’ First Amendment rights are unlikely to be resolved soon.

Making a space sacred

Rising costs and shrinking budgets suggest more congregations in the future may consider non-traditional worship locations. More congregations are meeting in multiple locations than in the past, which sometimes necessitates using secular places for worship.[6] With planning and consideration for all parties involved, a renting congregation can be a blessing for its host site. Ron Edmondson (www.churchleaders.com) gives the following advice for churches meeting in a school: (1) grow volunteers; (2) love the school; (3) realize it’s not a rental situation; (4) be a blessing; (5) don’t interrupt school; (6) view your rent as a contribution; and (7) acknowledge critical players.[7] Good advice for all congregations making a space sacred.     

---

[1] Less than 1% rent space from another church.

[2] See the U.S. Congregational Life Survey, 2001 and 2008/2009 (www.USCongregations.org); National Congregations Study (archived on the ARDA website); Faith Communities Today: FACT 2008 and FACT 2010.

[3] The National Congregation Study found that non-traditional locations were least common in the Northeast.

[4] LifeWay Research blog

[5] National Congregations Study (ARDA).

[6] http://leadnet.org/resources/download/multisite_is_multiplying_new_developments_in_the_movements_expansion/

[7] http://www.churchleaders.com/outreach-missions/outreach-missions-how-tos/150776-7-outreach-suggestions-for-churches-meeting-in-schools.html

How Do Worshipers’ Decisions about Church Giving Add Up for the Whole Church?

By Cynthia Woolever

What influences worshipers’ decisions about giving to their church? It depends on (a) the personal characteristics of the worshiper, (b) his or her level of involvement, and (c) the congregation’s denominational affiliation. We think of giving as an individual decision but the church context also plays a role in what an individual might give.

Jack Marcum, coordinator of Research Services, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), presented his research on the relationship between individual giving and the giving pattern for an entire congregation at the recent Religious Research Association meeting. He wanted to take into account the church context—the denomination or faith group and overall giving levels in the church where the individual worships. He hypothesized that a number of individual attributes (demographics, level of involvement) as well as features of the congregation itself relate to how much a worshiper decides to contribute. In turn, the collective decisions of all worshipers alter the overall giving patterns for the church. This in turn affects the overall financial take for the entire church. Here are a few highlights from his presentation.

The U.S. Congregational Life Survey asked worshipers how much several factors influence their financial contributions to their church. It was clear that how they responded was related to their church’s denominational affiliation.

Denomination is Relevant

For conservative Protestant worshipers, the majority said these three were a major influence in their giving decisions:

• A sense of gratitude for God’s love and goodness (70%)
• The Bible’s teaching on giving (58%)
• Wanting to contribute to God’s work in the world (51%)

How did mainline Protestant worshipers respond? No single factor was named by a majority of these worshipers as a major influence on their church giving. However, the top three factors—cited by the highest percentage of worshipers as a major giving influence were:

• A sense of gratitude for God’s love and goodness (43%)
• Wanting to contribute to God’s work in the world (36%)
• A sense of religious duty to give (34%)

At most, only about four out of ten Catholic worshipers were inspired to give by the factors included in the survey, citing any one reason as a major influence. The largest numbers of Catholics said these three were a major influence on their giving:

• A sense of gratitude for God’s love and goodness (44%)
• A sense of religious duty to give (34%)
• Wanting to contribute to God’s work in the world (33%)

What Other Worshipers Do Is (Mostly) Irrelevant  

Marcum also examined whether the giving level of the entire congregation was related to how much an individual worshiper in that same congregation would decide to give. He divided all congregations into high, medium, and low giving churches based on the median overall levels of giving. But, as it turned out, once he controlled for other factors (such as denominational family) this contextual element was not relevant to overall church giving levels. That is, an individual worshiper’s giving is about the same whether most worshipers give larger percentages or smaller percentages to the church. 

Increasing the Congregational Average: Dollar Amount or Percentage Giving?

Only one factor remained important for understanding the overall level of financial contributions—how individuals make decisions around financial contributions to the church. When many worshipers decide on an annual dollar figure, the total amount given to the church is less. Mainline Protestant worshipers were most likely to indicate that they make a decision based on an annual figure (29%). In contrast, only 8% of conservative Protestant and 9% of Catholic worshipers choose an annual dollar figure as the bases for their church giving.

Conservative Protestant worshipers tend to give financially larger shares of their income to their congregation and are more likely to worship in a church with higher giving levels overall. These worshipers say they decide on a percent of their income annually (29% do) rather than a dollar figure. Catholic worshipers, who tend to give less on average than other worshipers do, say they typically decide on a weekly dollar amount (42% do) rather than an annual amount or a percentage of income.

What’s the best advice for your church’s stewardship message? First, consider the most effective strategies for encouraging higher giving in your denomination. In general, when many worshipers decide how much to give based on a weekly or annual dollar amount, this results in smaller contributions overall. Instead, encourage worshipers to consider percentage giving and emphasize that they grow that percentage over time. Second, stress that worshipers give out of gratitude for God’s love and goodness.

Check out earlier posts about what influences individual giving levels:  http://presbyterian.typepad.com/beyondordinary/2010/03/ten-reasons-why-we-give.html

 

What Kind of Christians Support Merry Christmas (only)?

By Cynthia Woolever

Almost all Americans (95%) celebrate Christmas, even those who say they are not too religious.[1] Yet in the public square, controversy continues about greeting others with “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Holidays” (considered by many to be more inclusive of non-Christians). Beyond just the greeting, other seasonal activities and traditions stir debates. In fact, two states—Wisconsin and Rhode Island—have called the evergreen in their state capital a holiday tree rather than a Christmas tree.

Do most Christian worshipers reject any kind of multiculturalism or relativism that tends to generate more inclusive seasonal language and public holiday displays? No. In fact, the majority of Catholic and mainline Protestant Christians support Christmas displays that incorporate religious symbols of multiple faith traditions.[2]  

The U.S. Congregational Life Survey provides additional evidence of a Christian theological divide behind this season’s disagreements. The findings below represent the views of worshipers who participated in a survey during religious services. Thus, the results reflect the views of people who actually attend worship services versus the many polls of people who describe themselves as religious.

Conservative Protestant Worshipers vs. Other Christians

The majority of conservative Protestant worshipers do not agree with theological statements that indicate appreciation or tolerance for other religious traditions. On the other hand, more than half of Catholic and mainline Protestant worshipers express views consistent with an open stance toward non-Christians or people with “no religion.” 

These survey results show how differently Christians in three faith groups express their understanding of salvation and Biblical teachings.

Figure 1

Do you agree or disagree with this statement: “All the different religions are equally good ways of helping a person find ultimate truth.”

• 62% of conservative Protestant worshipers disagree
• 27% of mainline Protestant worshipers disagree
• 20% of Catholic worshipers disagree

Figure 2

Which statement comes closest to your view of the Bible?

“The Bible is the word of God, to be taken literally word for word.”

• 55% of conservative Protestant worshipers agree
• 19% of mainline Protestant worshipers agree
• 17% of Catholic worshipers agree

Figure 3

Do you agree or disagree: “Only followers of Jesus Christ can be saved.”

• 74% of conservative Protestant worshipers agree
• 42% of mainline Protestant worshipers agree
• 39% of Catholic worshipers agree

The Nones

The growing percentage of people who say they have no religious affiliation—more than one in ten adults are now in this group—also celebrate the season with family and friends. Eric Weiner, author of “Man Seeks God: My Flirtations with the Divine,” claims he is among those who are undecided about God.[3] Yet he sees Christmas as an opportunity to discuss the private nature of religion publicly. He writes, “We Nones may not believe in God, but we hope to one day. We have a dog in this hunt.” He hopes for “a religious space that celebrates doubt, encourages experimentation and allows one to utter the word God without embarrassment.” Weiner’s preferred view of God: “a semicolon, connecting people, and generating what Aldous Huxley called ‘human grace.” This is certainly a message with the potential to unite people rather than divide them. Will your congregation offer this space for Nones in your midst this Christmas?

 

---

[1] The Gallup Poll (2010) also reports 80% of non-Christians celebrate the Christmas holiday. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/145367/christmas-strongly-religious-half-celebrate.aspx)

[2] U.S. News & World Report (2009). (http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/jodie-allen/2009/12/21/merry-christmas-vs-happy-holidays-americans-are-apathetic)

[3] Eric Weiner, “Americans: Undecided About God?” New York Times, December 10, 2011. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/opinion/sunday/americans-and-god.html)

Question Authority?

By Cynthia Woolever

Worshipers grant the pastor some level of authority as their designated leader. What is the basis for that recognition? Jackson Carroll addresses that question and the nature of authority in his most recent book, As One With Authority (second edition, 2011).[i] The authority to lead gives the pastor the right to exercise power in a particular group or institution. Carroll asserts that there are at least two bases for pastoral authority: (1) that which arises as a representative of the sacred; and (2) that which stems from expertise, gifts, and capabilities. As long as the group acknowledges the leader’s legitimate right to exercise power, the leader is acting with authority.

In his earlier work, God’s Potters (2006), Carroll describes pastoral ministry as an occupation in flux.[ii] He believes there are three views of ministry but that they are not mutually exclusive. Rather each model focuses on a particular feature of pastoral leadership that its proponents believe is the most important characteristic for defining a church leader. The first model sees pastoral leadership as an office, a formal or official position with specific duties. A congregation or denomination makes the role sacred through the rites of ordination. The second model views ministry as a profession, carried out by ordained professionals, who are socialized into the field through seminary education and training. The third model of pastoral ministry holds that ministry is a calling. This model gives emphasis to the spiritual dimension of pastoral leadership, essentially affirming that God selects or calls certain individuals to carry out ministry. 

Faith traditions vary in how they view authority issues in ministry. Some tend to reference infallible Scripture or the teaching office as the source of pastoral authority. Other groups emphasize individuals’ personal knowledge of God and the inner conviction that God has called those people to ministry.

We asked pastoral leaders about several factors that might influence the congregation’s acceptance of their leadership. How important are the following four characteristics in how worshipers view their leadership: (1) being ordained (relates to ministry as office); (2) having a seminary degree or certificate (relates to ministry as profession); (3) having a clear sense of call from God (relates to ministry as calling); and (4) being competent in the tasks of ministry, including preaching (relates to ministry as profession)?

Ministry as Office

Almost all Catholic priests (95%) indicate that being ordained is of “great importance” for their current congregation’s acceptance of their leadership. Three out of four mainline Protestant pastors (74%) also say that ordination is of great importance for their congregation’s acceptance. However, less than half of conservative Protestant pastors (40%) report that ordination is of great importance to their congregation. A similar percentage of conservative Protestant pastors (42%) say ordination is “somewhat important” for their congregation. 

Ministry as Profession

Pastors are close to unanimous in affirming that their expertise, gifts, and capabilities are a source of their ministry authority. Nine out of ten pastors—regardless of faith tradition—say that being competent in the tasks of ministry, including preaching, is of great importance for their congregation’s acceptance of their authority.

Pastors see seminary training as less related to gaining congregational acceptance for their leadership. About half of Catholic priests (50%) and mainline Protestant pastors (59%) report that a seminary degree or certificate is of great importance for their leadership role. Only one in four conservative Protestant pastors (25%) believe that a seminary degree or certificate is of great importance for their ministry authority.

Ministry as Calling

As one might expect, conservative Protestant pastors give considerable weight to pastoral leadership based on a sense of God’s call. Most of these pastors (85%) believe that a clear sense of call from God is of great importance for the congregation’s acceptance of their leadership. While a sense of call is important for Catholic priests and mainline Protestant pastors, it is much less so. About two out of three in these groups (69% for Catholic priests; 63% for mainline Protestant pastors) respond that a sense of call is of great importance for their pastoral authority in the congregation.

Respecting Leadership Authority: Competency Comes First

Catholic priests see their authority arising from their ordination (office) and capabilities (profession). Mainline Protestant pastors believe their authority rests on their competencies (profession) and slightly less so on their ordination (office). Conservative Protestant pastors portray their authority as stemming from their ministry competencies first, closely followed by their call from God (calling).   

These results support Carroll’s thesis that the three models of ministry are not mutually exclusive. Pastors draw on multiple sources of authority as they serve congregations. In this time when many question all authority, pastors need to claim the historical roots of their authority:

    “And when Jesus finished these sayings, the crowds were astonished at his teaching, for he

    taught them as one who had authority, and not as their scribes.”

                  Matthew 7:28-29 

---

[i] Jackson W Carroll, As One With Authority: Reflective Leadership in Ministry (Eugene, Oregon: Cascade Books, 2011).

[ii] Jackson W. Carroll, God’s Potters: Pastoral Leadership and the Shaping of Congregations (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006).

Are All Your Friends in Church, Leaving No One to Invite?

By Deborah Bruce

In a fascinating talk at a new church development conference, I recently heard church planter, Dan Kimball, comment that the number of non-Christian people that worshipers hang out with decreases the longer they have been Christians. He suggests the trend might look like this:

Kimball said that this phenomena influences how likely people are to invite others to church. If you don’t know many non-Christians, who would you invite?

Friends at church. The U.S. Congregational Life Survey asked about friends and acquaintances who also attend the congregation. Compared to long-time members, more worshipers who are new to their congregation say they have little contact outside of worship with others who attend there. But as the years pass, this changes. Worshipers get to know one another and build strong bonds with other worshipers. Very few of the people attending a church for more than 20 years say they have no contact with other worshipers.

All my friends are here. Dan Kimball’s argument would suggest that worshipers attending a church for many years would have few friends outside the church. We found that long-term worshipers have more friends in the church. But even among worshipers attending their church for more than 20 years, most have at least some friends outside their church.

Inviting. Finally, let’s test Kimball’s theory that having most of your friends at your church decreases inviting. In fact—no! People with more friends at church are more likely to have invited someone to worship there than others. Worshipers invite others to share in the connections they enjoy and the caring relationships worshipers provide for one another.

Implications. We can’t directly answer the question about the types of people Christians come in contact with, so Dan Kimball might be right on that account. But these findings point to the positive impact of having friendships within the congregation. Not only do those friends provide the love and care that we all need, they also appear to strengthen bonds to the church. And people who are connected to their church are more likely to invite others to come experience the same.

Learn more about church planter, Dan Kimball.

 

Finances and Faith

By Joelle Kopacz

"Money is the opposite of the weather. Nobody talks about it, but everybody does something about it." - Rebecca Johnson, novelist

Money is a touchy subject to talk about in daily life—and it’s also a difficult issue to discuss from the pulpit. Pastors may be afraid that if they preach about money they will offend others and attract criticism. (For more reasons pastors avoid preaching sermons about money, click here.)  And pastors’ fears aren’t completely unwarranted.  Although nearly three in four worshipers (72%) report that they worry about finances “a lot” or “sometimes,” half of worshipers think that money is an inappropriate topic of discussion in worship (22%) or are unsure about such discussions (31%).

The other half of worshipers think talking about money in worship is acceptable (48%).  Who are these worshipers who are most receptive to Sunday morning discussions about finances?

Worshipers who give generously to the congregation are more likely to think money is an appropriate topic of discussion.  Nearly three in five worshipers (57%) who give about 5% or more of their net income regularly to the congregation think it is okay to talk about money in worship. In contrast, one in three worshipers (37%) who regularly give less than 5% of their net income support discussions of money in church.

Conservative Protestants more often find it appropriate to discuss finances in church services.  Two in three conservative Protestant worshipers (64%) are comfortable with conversations about money in church, compared to 47% of mainline Protestant worshipers and 39% of Catholic worshipers.  Conservative Protestants are also more likely than Catholics and mainline Protestants to give 10% or more of their net income to the congregation (see an earlier blog post by Cynthia Woolever).  Perhaps conservative Protestant worshipers are more comfortable in general relating their faith to their finances.

Connected worshipers support the church’s discussion of financial issues.  Worshipers are more likely to think it’s appropriate to discuss financial issues in worship when they are involved in decision making within the congregation, feel a strong and growing sense of belonging to their congregation, and say that their congregation’s worship or activities greatly help them with everyday living.  Worshipers whose lives are invested in their congregation seem more willing to hear what the church has to say about finances.

 

Addressing the topic of money in worship may feel risky or daunting, but it can be done with grace and theological integrity. If you are a pastor, here are some tips for discussing money with your congregation.  To find out how churches are using programs, partnerships, and the pulpit to tackle the economic recession, read this article from Faith and Leadership.

 

Happy Thanksgiving!

We’re stuffing today:

Here’s hoping your stuffing is much more delicious!

We’re thankful to every congregation that has taken the U.S. Congregational Life Survey. We couldn’t do what we do without the help of worshipers, pastors, and churches across the country. And thanks for reading!

Recommended Read—Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard

By Deborah Bruce

Chip and Dan Heath have another best-seller—Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard. It’s a fascinating read, full of wonderful examples and real-life situations.

Why is change hard? The authors help us understand that the rational, logical side of our brain often competes with the brain’s emotional, instinctive side. They tag the brain’s emotional side as the headstrong Elephant, and the rational side, the Rider. Those images make it abundantly clear that no matter how fantastic the Rider’s vision of change is, the Elephant won’t turn in that direction without encouragement. The rational side wants to lose those extra pounds. The emotional side wants the ice cream. The rational side wants our congregation to begin a new ministry program. The emotional side is perfectly happy with things they way they are.

Riders and Elephants at their worst. But don’t assume that Riders are the good guys, and Elephants prevent change. At their worst, Riders become paralyzed by choice—they spin their wheels in the face of too many options. And they can seem dry and dull—all analysis and no feeling—or negative—always focusing on the problems. At their worst, Elephants are fearful, resistant, and spooked by the possibility of change. They go for short-term satisfaction and are easily demoralized by bigger quests. Yet feelings inspire and motivate Elephants. And Elephants possess incredible strength and drive.

Shaping change. Change can happen when the Rider and Elephant trust one another; when the Rider directs the Elephant toward an appealing destination and shapes the path to get there. The authors show that Shaping the Path is the third key element in change. What appears to be a people problem (they don’t want to change) may instead be a situation problem. Changing the situation—Shaping the Path—makes change more likely.

Find the bright spots. I particularly appreciate the authors’ suggestion to find the bright spots. Just as we encourage congregations to identify and build on their strengths, the book advocates finding bright spots. Learning what already works and doing more of it gives the Rider direction and helps motivate the Elephant.   

The book includes many rich illustrations of successful change in family life, communities, medicine, industry, education, and government. These examples help the reader learn how to Direct the Rider, Motivate the Elephant, and Shape the Path. I came away with a new language for discussing change and lots of practical ideas. I’ve already tried a couple with my husband—successfully I might add!

How might you use these practical tools to make changes in your congregation?

Read the first chapter here.  I know you’ll want to read the rest!