Newsletter #71

On Counterfeit Revitalization

Happy Memorial Day! I plan to eat a grilled hot dog in memory of Grandma Kay. She didn’t die in combat for her nation, but if the next guy must go to the lake and get intoxicated for no other reason than it being Memorial Day, then I can eat a hot dog.

---

It’s Not What You Think it Is

In 2020, I wrote an article for the Helwys Society Forum entitled, “Church Revitalization: Myths and Realities.” Occasionally, it’s healthy and humbling to revisit things you wrote in the past. You spot errors, undeveloped thoughts, and perhaps even things you may have changed your mind on. Also, given how some themes and arguments persist in your life and mind, it’s helpful to revisit them in written form.

When I wrote this HSF article, I was limited by a word count. I would have liked to have said more about those four realities (and counter-myths) of church revitalization. Nevertheless, I stand by the article entirely. Time has only solidified these in my thinking. Yet I’ve been struck by how a minor theme in the article often surfaces in the experience of many pastors and churches. Let me express that theme by providing two excerpts from the article below:

Revitalization, then, is a ministry for churches experiencing a discernible, sustained pattern of spiritual decline, demonstrated numerically, attitudinally, and organizationally. Revitalization attempts not simply to replicate a previous era of the church or to reinvent the church so that it appears vibrant. Church revitalization requires biblical wisdom to assess the actual condition of a church and humble faith that God will use His means to revitalize a church…

Effective leaders ask the right questions and make reasonable stipulations during the interview process. They prayerfully examine the context and listen carefully. They identify the right priorities and work to foster a sense of urgency. Courage and compassion then converge to initiate change. Even when progress seems to happen, leaders are slow to declare victory. Changing the culture of a church takes time. We should start thinking in terms of a decade, not four or five years. Changing the church’s mood is not changing its culture. Good leaders discern the difference.

Pay close attention to the highlighted portions. They point to a real and risky phenomenon: counterfeit revitalization.

I’m not sure when I first thought of this notion, but one exchange comes to mind.

Perhaps six or seven years ago I was talking to a brother who had been involved in a church renewal effort. He commented on the priority of getting into a facility and reworking the entire stage area to make it more appealing. I didn’t disagree that this was an appropriate and necessary step. After all, most of us have seen more than one sanctuary stage area that screamed, “Help! I’m stuck in the 1940s.” You don’t have to become a 1980s or 90s version of a seeker sensitive church to realize that the place from which worship is being led benefits from some aesthetic and practical attention.

What alarmed me about the remark, however, was that it seemed to be so high on the priority list of revitalization steps.

Getting Honest about the Danger

As the years have gone by and our church has had to address many facility challenges and needs, I’ve been reminded of a related conundrum. I’m not thinking about the enduring need to reconcile facility needs with financial constraints and good stewardship principles, though this is essential and demanding. What haunts me is the notion that we can deceive ourselves into thinking that facility improvements are necessarily equivalent to spiritual vitality and renewal.

Let’s lean in. Is it possible that a renewed commitment to Jesus and reaching one’s community could spur a congregation to take steps to improve the function and appearance of its worship space and grounds? Most certainly! It isn’t difficult at all to envision a group of people having their devotion to God rekindled, and as a result, engaged in some kind of physical project. The returning exiles of both Ezra and Nehemiah’s day illustrate this as they rebuild the temple and the city walls. The prophet Haggai even rebuked people for dwelling in relative comfort while such matters were left unattended.

Lest someone invoke the Old Covenant/New Covenant distinction here to refute my point, just pay closer to the storyline. It isn’t that the prophets were saying that externalities automatically demonstrated fidelity. Hadn’t they been clear on this point time and time again? Israel went through periods of maintaining sacrifices and temple activities, while perverting justice. God cared about both ritual and righteousness, the cultus and the culture.

This dynamic can, I believe, function as an analogy of sorts to New Covenant ministry. If some trellis work (purchasing literature, replacing carpet, running bus routes) is needed to support vine growth (education, safety, gathering), then revitalization could be partially demonstrated through some tangible, external changes. In this context, I’m thinking especially about facility improvements.

Building renovations can rally people together. Depending on the project, they can create an opportunity for collaboration. They can remind people who haven’t seen such projects undertaken in years of key lessons: “With God’s help, we can still do things.” “We have great volunteers and officers who we can trust to get the job done.” Or “We hope our future guests and eventually members will be blessed by this.”

But dangers lurk around every corner. With every nail, two-by-four, or extra bid, disagreement and division can surface. And there’s an even deeper threat besides differences of opinion: we can confuse building work for the deep spiritual work that’s needed. Structural things and spiritual things aren’t unrelated, but they are far from the same.

Aesthetic improvements, technology upgrades, and even some fresh paint in the right places can generate a lot of excitement. They can stop people in their tracks, prompt water cooler conversation in the lobby, and even make people feel better about their church. But then the newness wears off. So does the excitement. What remains? Possibly, the same, sluggish, declining ministry.

Spot it, Name it, Resist it

Responsible church members, leaders, and senior pastors need to be relentless and vigilant. They need to be relentless in their prayers for spiritual renewal and change. Alongside such praying, they need to be vigilant for signs of counterfeit revitalization, whether it be unchecked excitement over overdue maintenance being performed, or unrealistic expectations about what such changes might mean for the actual condition of the church.

We’re all easily distracted. These distractions often come from flickering pixels, but sometimes they come from something we’ve done with our hands that we can’t help but stand back and admire. Meanwhile, the hardest work goes ignored: conversations, fasting, study, exhortation, transformation.

Consider the following diagnostic questions:

What seems to be getting the loudest applause in your revitalization ministry?

What do (or would) people likely identify as reasons why they think the church is “moving forward”?

Where can repentance be spotted in the body?

Does the church balk at spending money on ministry interns, outreach initiatives, or the missions budget, while pressing ahead in spending the same amount on facility improvements?

None of these questions alone are sufficient to diagnosis a clear case of counterfeit revitalization. Collectively, they speak volumes.

Let me conclude with the best concise counsel I have to offer (from my prior article) on counterfeit revitalization:

Even when progress seems to happen, leaders are slow to declare victory. Changing the culture of a church takes time. We should start thinking in terms of a decade, not four or five years. Changing the church’s mood is not changing its culture. Good leaders discern the difference.

---

Follow-Up:

In my last newsletter I reflected on Tim Keller’s significant legacy. In the last week, many excellent tributes have poured in. Here’s a very useful one with 50 memorable quotes from Keller’s preaching and/or writing.

---

Currently Reading:

Lloyd Rohler, George Wallace: Conservative-Populist.

Abraham Kuyper, Common Grace (Volume 1): God’s Gifts for a Fallen World.

---

Quote of the Week:

Abortion, like LGBTQ thinking in general, has relevance beyond the immediate issue: It speaks not just to how one deals with an unwanted pregnancy, but how one understands what it means to be human. The connection between abortion and queerness is obvious. Both involve the basic repudiation of the authority of the human body and its natural functions and purpose….The T and the Q must inevitably devour the L, the G, and the B because those three initials at least recognize the authority of the sexed body at some level. The T and the Q deny that. Period. That is why gay men such as Andrew Sullivan can be decried as transphobes for making the once rather obvious point that gay men are sexually attracted to other men, not women pretending to be men.

Carl Trueman, “All Roads Lead to Queerdom?”