Ship of Fools: What if any special programs build church membership?

Thread: What if any special programs build church membership? Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=028807

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

From a thread in Ecclsiantics -

quote:
Originally posted by Dog Dad:
...To not have music or accompaniment at any [Christmas Eve] services is guaranteed to alienate most everyone and ensure that any visitors will NOT consider your church for future membership.

I am intrigued at the idea that people who visit a holiday special service would come back and become members. I thought the Christmas Eve, and Easter, extras in the congregation are travelers, families showing up to please their visiting Grandma, and non-denominational people looking for a traditional Christmas Eve because their own church is dark that night.

My Mom's church had an outstanding organ and organist, for several years they put on free monthly organ concerts on Sunday afternoons. After several years they went through the records and discovered only two people had joined the church from coming to a concert. They stopped the series, realizing they were spending a lot of money and effort but attracting music lovers interested in a concert instead of people interested in choosing a church.

Churches around here widely advertise special events, and I hear the theory "if we can just get them into the building they'll come back and join the church." (Especially the churches with visually attractive interiors seen to think that.)

Does it work? Does a special program or stained glass windows get people to visit for the special program or decorative beauty and then join the church as active members?

Are there specific kinds of special programs that work well to attract future members?

I'm not saying we should stop the special programs, just wondering if "attractive new members" is a realistic expectation, as opposed to primarily delighting the existing congregation, those who like to do special things as well as those who like to watch them.

I do know one person who changed church because of a special program - a huge Baptist church did a near professional quality song dance narrative program with over 100 performers, she wanted to be in it.

[ 11. November 2014, 19:40: Message edited by: Belle Ringer ]

Posted by Steve Langton (# 17601) on :

"If we can just get them back in the building they'll join the church" is pretty much a non-starter. The first requirement is that the church is a place where the gospel is preached, believed, and lived out in members' lives.

Special programs will work if they embody that - if that is lacking, special programs offering things also available in a secular form won't help much.

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

People join a church because they feel a need of something they think that particular church has. If they don't feel any need, there is no way they are going to join.

Moo

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:

Are there specific kinds of special programs that work well to attract future members?

I'm not saying we should stop the special programs, just wondering if "attractive new members" is a realistic expectation, as opposed to primarily delighting the existing congregation, those who like to do special things as well as those who like to watch them.

I don't have an answer for your church, but there clearly are churches that are growing, so that's a 'realistic expectation' for them.

Some churches run programmes in order to serve the community rather than as an explicit form of evangelism. This is perhaps the best approach for a church that doesn't have the level of spiritual intensity and commitment to devote to serious evangelistic outreach. But you have to take care to ensure that these programmes don't detract from the work of nurturing the congregation.

[ 12. November 2014, 12:56: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

I don't think programs attract new members, bar one possibility--people do often join churches they already have a connection to via their kids--for example, the child is attending the parochial school run by that church. A school must count as a program, I suppose. But it's a long term one, and not exactly the kind of thing most churches start up solely with the idea, "Hey, let's attract new members!"

As for all the other programs, especially the short term ones--plays, concerts, youth groups, ministry fairs, church picnics, etc. etc. etc., I think it's fair to say that programs don't attract people, PEOPLE attract people. (leaving aside the divine influence--oh dear, that sounds pretty bad, doesn't it?)

But seriously--how did you join your current church? For most people, I'm guessing the answer will be "So-and-so goes to that church, and s/he got me hooked in."

We came to our current host congregation because our volunteer organist at the old parish went there, and she recommended it.

Our Vietnamese people, almost to a person, came to us because they got to know one of our members during a time of need and just followed them right into the congregation.

So if I was in charge of building church membership, I wouldn't lay out the budget on big events. Rather, I'd schmooze around and talk to individual members one-on-one and ask them, "Do you know anybody right now among your friends, clients, etc. who needs help* of a kind the church might provide? Would you be willing to serve as the introducer so they get that kind of help from us? You know, make the phone call, go along with them the first few times, sit with them on Sunday?"

* Here I'm thinking the full range of the church's already-in-place ministries, from counseling to tutoring to food pantry to just plain social gatherings. Those things provide the excuse for a future member to test the waters at a congregation ("Joan told me about your parent's day out program") without having to be obvious about whatever other needs there are to be met ("Truth? I'm lonely, I feel like I really don't know this city or belong anywhere, I have questions about God but don't know who to ask, I just want someone who actually cares about us...").

I'm rambling again. But IMHO programs are an excuse for coming, not the main reason people choose to come in truth. That reason (aside from God, again) is people. They have relationships with your members, and that draws them in.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
SvitlanaV2: Some churches run programmes in order to serve the community rather than as an explicit form of evangelism. This is perhaps the best approach for a church that doesn't have the level of spiritual intensity and commitment to devote to serious evangelistic outreach.

If you serve the community, then you don't have a high level of spiritual intensity and commitment [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
"If we can just get them back in the building they'll join the church" is pretty much a non-starter. The first requirement is that the church is a place where the gospel is preached, believed, and lived out in members' lives.

Yes. I have heard of Ministers getting very excited to see the Church full on a Saturday night because it is being used for a concert by the local Choral Society. But that is silly: it has no relation to church growth whatsoever.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:
SvitlanaV2: Some churches run programmes in order to serve the community rather than as an explicit form of evangelism. This is perhaps the best approach for a church that doesn't have the level of spiritual intensity and commitment to devote to serious evangelistic outreach.
If you serve the community, then you don't have a high level of spiritual intensity and commitment

Well, not all churches are into 'spiritual intensity', but that doesn't mean they don't want to be of service.

Also, I think social programmes often tend to be run by a handful of church members, and the rest don't necessarily feel the need to be involved. Church evangelism, OTOH, probably requires that everyone be kept on board, otherwise conflict could occur, which would undermine the work. Indeed, I often hear that longstanding church members can feel ambivalent about new people coming in, because newcomers can change the whole atmosphere and tone of a church.

Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :

It all really depends, one of my closest friends at the UMC church we attend did join because she came to a Christmas concert, and said this place had a music program she loved, so it was the church for her.

Heck, we entered the church because we were interested in its liberal politics and community work, but we stayed partially because of the energy of the music that first Sunday we came.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
So if I was in charge of building church membership, I wouldn't lay out the budget on big events. Rather, I'd schmooze around and talk to individual members one-on-one and ask them, "Do you know anybody right now among your friends, clients, etc. who needs help* of a kind the church might provide? Would you be willing to serve as the introducer so they get that kind of help from us? You know, make the phone call, go along with them the first few times, sit with them on Sunday?"

* Here I'm thinking the full range of the church's already-in-place ministries, from counseling to tutoring to food pantry to just plain social gatherings...

...IMHO programs are an excuse for coming, not the main reason people choose to come in truth. That reason (aside from God, again) is people. They have relationships with your members, and that draws them in.

I love your "who needs our help" concept. Usually evangelism talks say "bring a friend" but the focus is getting more bodies in the door rather than how can we as a church meet needs in ways this church does well?

How do I end up in a church? I've moved a couple dozen times in adult life, in a new city you don't start out with friends, so choosing a church is not based on existing connections. I did let a neighbor lead me to her church but it was so family oriented I was a severe misfit. Connections need to be focused on "what does this person need," not on a vague sense that we are supposed to invite people to join our church.

I attend special events, conferences, etc at various churches. Has never crossed my mind that I would like to attend the church because of that event. By definition a special event is not what that host church is normally like!

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

Our church now has its own building and we've found that 'special events' on Sunday don't achieve much, but activities that fill needs at other times have had some success.

It's early days yet: we'll see how things look in a year or two.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

No church should 'put-on' special events with the specific purpose of snaring new adherents. They can, maybe should, put on special events and welcome people from the community to them but not with any purpose other than neighbourliness and providing hospitality.

Of course, you can advertise the other activities that are at the church during the special event - in the case of an organ recital you can hold it just before a service so that the person who's come to hear the music is sitting in the middle of people who've come for the service: they may stay on and may enjoy it.

But trying to be something you're not is a recipe for disaster.

Matthew 25:35 says 'I was hungry and you fed me; I was thirsty and you gave me water.' It does not say '..and you fed me, following up the food with an attempt to convert me'.

Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
"If we can just get them back in the building they'll join the church" is pretty much a non-starter. The first requirement is that the church is a place where the gospel is preached, believed, and lived out in members' lives.
Yes. I have heard of Ministers getting very excited to see the Church full on a Saturday night because it is being used for a concert by the local Choral Society. But that is silly: it has no relation to church growth whatsoever.

I don't think you're completely right there.

There isn't a direct correlation, but it seems to me that getting people into a church building for whatever purpose is helpful.

The people who come for a concert are unlikely to then come back on Sunday for a service. BUT...

a) Sometimes, it DOES happen that someone coming to a concert gets attracted by the building or the ambiance or something (call it the touch of God if you want to) and makes a decision to try that church out.

b) More often, it is simply a case of people having their awareness raised of the church's existence. "I didn't know you were here" or "I never knew this was a church" are not uncommon responses.

c) People are far more likely to come to a special service in a building they already know than in a place this is completely new to them. So you could argue that coming to a concert sort of lowers the barriers of resistance and makes it slightly more likely that they may come back for something else - especially if they have had a good experience (the concert went well and the church was warm and inviting).

To say that none of this has any relation to church growth is mistaken, I believe.

Most people come to faith gradually - with lots of small steps along the way. One of those small steps is to actually cross the threshold of a church building for the first time. We shouldn't forget how intimidating that can be. If we can get people crossing the threshold for something "unthreatening" like a concert, so much the better.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

There are secondary membership benefits. I find that our outreach efforts to our neighborhood rarely yield direct new members, probably due to the factors already mentioned as well as cultural/ ethnic mismatch. Many/most already have their own church involvement so that's appropriate.

But I have found that our reputation as a church that is going the extra mile to serve our neighbors does draw a number of new members, mostly people who are already Christian but are new to the area.

Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:

Are there specific kinds of special programs that work well to attract future members?

I'm not saying we should stop the special programs, just wondering if "attractive new members" is a realistic expectation, as opposed to primarily delighting the existing congregation, those who like to do special things as well as those who like to watch them.

I don't have an answer for your church, but there clearly are churches that are growing, so that's a 'realistic expectation' for them.

Some churches run programmes in order to serve the community rather than as an explicit form of evangelism. This is perhaps the best approach for a church that doesn't have the level of spiritual intensity and commitment to devote to serious evangelistic outreach. But you have to take care to ensure that these programmes don't detract from the work of nurturing the congregation.

Erm, the best church-run community programmes I know are done by a church that takes evangelistic outreach extremely seriously.

Maybe you know some very insular evangelical churches because in my experience, it's the most evangelistic ones that do the best community projects.

Serving the community is surely an essential part of evangelism?

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

I do know churches that serve the community and also have a strong commitment to evangelism. The two often go together in evangelistic churches. But I was talking about service to the community for the kind of church that can't, for whatever reason, focus heavily on evangelism.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
SvitlanaV2: But I was talking about service to the community for the kind of church that can't, for whatever reason, focus heavily on evangelism.

I really can't follow you. There's probably a load of hidden assumptions that I'm missing here.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Some churches run programmes in order to serve the community rather than as an explicit form of evangelism.

I've been in churches that do things like take one day a week of the community soup kitchen, no one but the soup kitchen staff and the volunteers of the week knows they are from any church. Another builds ramps once a month for poor people who are newly in a wheelchair, names received from social workers, a member of that team told me they don't say attempt to talk about church or God. Community service without evangelism.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:
SvitlanaV2: But I was talking about service to the community for the kind of church that can't, for whatever reason, focus heavily on evangelism.
I really can't follow you. There's probably a load of hidden assumptions that I'm missing here.

This is how it seems to me:

Most churches engage in some form of social outreach. All hope it'll send positive messages about Christianity and the church. But some do it as an explicit part of a thought-out evangelistic agenda, and others simply want to serve the community and have no evangelistic goal or plan.

I come from a British Methodist background. Methodists are known for being good at the social engagement, but fairly weak at intentional evangelism. Indeed, the word evangelism can seem rather scary to some Methodists (although at one stage a few years ago evangelism was being referred to as 'flavour of the month'). There are demographic and sociological reasons for this.

Intentional evangelism takes lots of work, as far as I can tell. It's not something that churches can have warm feelings about and then pursue their daily business as usual. All churches are expected to be friendly and charitable as a bare minimum, so these characteristics alone won't make most people stop and think about the meaning of life. People do join friendly and charitable churches, of course, but a growing church will probably have something else to offer.

I don't know about Brazil or the Netherlands. Things may well be different there.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
SvitlanaV2: Most churches engage in some form of social outreach. All hope it'll send positive messages about Christianity and the church. But some do it as an explicit part of a thought-out evangelistic agenda, and others simply want to serve the community and have no evangelistic goal or plan.

Some churches do community outreach because they want to help people in some way.

From your posts, I get the feeling that you divide churches into those who can do evangelism and those who can't, because they lack 'spiritual intensity'. And that community outreach is some kind of stop gap for the second category.

Also, the link between spiritual intensity and evangelism begs the question: do churches who can't do evangelism automatically lack spiritual intensity?

And what about churches who don't want to do evangelism? Not because they're unable to for some reason, but because they choose not to do it?

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

LeRoc

I agree that 'spiritually intense' is a subjective category, but I suspect that spiritually intense churches that have carefully thought out theological reasons why evangelism would be inappropriate are quite rare in the UK.

Some of these churches probably have an exclusivist theology and continue to exist due to endogamy and a tolerable birth and retention rate. Some liberal congregations benefit from a strong identity and a favourable setting that ensures a good supply of curious and sophisticated enquirers.

On the whole, though, the process of secularisation in the UK suggests that many of the of churches that fail to evangelise are in that position because they've lost the energy and the will to do so effectively and are more or less comfortable as they are, even if this means managing long-term decline.

This isn't a shocking thing to say, really. It's routine sociology of religion, and there's been quite a bit of research on the decline of the evangelistic impulse in Methodism, for example. However, as I implied, this isn't a reason to give up. Each church has a role to play. We're all part of the body of Christ. Serious evangelism is tough, and it's unrealistic to expect every church to prioritise it, but social engagement helps people, brings people together and creates positive vibes. Those are good things.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
SvitlanaV2: Some liberal congregations benefit from a strong identity and a favourable setting that ensures a good supply of curious and sophisticated enquirers.

This would be the case of my church group. We don't do evangelism, not because we're unable to, but because it isn't what we do. Yet we grow (some would say that we grow too much).

We do community outreach, we participate in ecumenical projects for the homeless, we organise lectures and so on, but the reason for doing this isn't in order to grow. We don't do them because we're incapable of evangelism. I guess we do these things because we want to contribute.

Whether we are 'spiritually intense'; I'm not sure if we'd use the word 'intense', we're too feet-on-the-ground for that. But we definitely put an emphasis on spirituality.

Posted by JoannaP (# 4493) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
From a thread in Ecclsiantics -

quote:
Originally posted by Dog Dad:
...To not have music or accompaniment at any [Christmas Eve] services is guaranteed to alienate most everyone and ensure that any visitors will NOT consider your church for future membership.
I am intrigued at the idea that people who visit a holiday special service would come back and become members. I thought the Christmas Eve, and Easter, extras in the congregation are travelers, families showing up to please their visiting Grandma, and non-denominational people looking for a traditional Christmas Eve because their own church is dark that night.

I think a lot of people who come to our Carol Service live nearby but do not normally go to church; they come at Christmastime because they enjoy singing carols they remember singing as a child.

If God were to become more important in their lives and they wanted to consider going to church, the one they visit once or twice a year is a good place to start. I agree with Oscar that going into a totally strange building can be hard; a little familiarity is better than none.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

I must admit, I'm rather nonplussed by the church Belle Ringer's talking about dropping its organ concerts simply because they've calculated that only two people have joined the church as a result ...

[Confused]

What's wrong with organ concerts for the sake of organ concerts?

What's wrong with art for art's sake?

If it were a case of either organ concerts or soup-run or homeless peoples' shelter then yes ... then I could understand the qualms ...

I agree with Baptist Trainfan on the thing about people getting excited simply because a church building is full for an event of some kind.

I'm chair of a local voluntary arts group and we often use church buildings for concerts and so on.

I often hear people saying, 'Wasn't it great to see so many people in a church building?' as if this is some kind of big deal in and of itself.

I agree with Oscar the Grouch that there can be something about breaking down barriers in all of that - but to me it's more about offering a service more generally to the community. If we've got buildings, let's use them for other people's benefit as well as our own ...

On the whole, I don't think that programmes are the answer - as so many people have said on this thread so far it's all about relationships and all about people. People attract people. Programmes don't attract people.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:

What's wrong with organ concerts for the sake of organ concerts?

What's wrong with art for art's sake?

I think it depends on the resources that this particular church is devoting to running these events.

If they're not too much bother and not too expensive then fair enough. But if lots of money and effort are being diverted from other important activities then the church might need to reflect on what its priorities and goals are.

Some churches have more resources than others, of course, and they don't need to worry too much about prioritising. We don't know what situation Belle Ringer's church is in.

Posted by John Holding (# 158) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:

What's wrong with organ concerts for the sake of organ concerts?

What's wrong with art for art's sake?
I think it depends on the resources that this particular church is devoting to running these events.

If they're not too much bother and not too expensive then fair enough. But if lots of money and effort are being diverted from other important activities then the church might need to reflect on what its priorities and goals are.

Which is of course what Gamaliel said in part of his post that you did not quote.

John

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

The point is that we don't know why Belle Ringer's church is so concerned about growing. If they're already doing okay by the standards of most mainstream churches then making a fuss about growth will appear to be unseemly.

Few churches today are running their own shelters for homeless people, which was the hypothetical example given. The 'important activities' that they might undertake apart from hosting concerts are likely to be far more humble - and hence more vulnerable.

Having said that, church social and artistic events are often hosted in order to raise money for some good cause, so it is possible to do something virtuous by promoting the cause of art.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I must admit, I'm rather nonplussed by the church Belle Ringer's talking about dropping its organ concerts simply because they've calculated that only two people have joined the church as a result ...

What's wrong with organ concerts for the sake of organ concerts?

It was intended as a way to getting people into the church building, on the theory some would come back again on Sunday mornings.

Apparently it cost money - extra pay for the organist for doing the extra work, music purchases, commercial advertising through newspapers and radio (this was pre-internet), another cleaning of the hall (post church and again post concert). I wasn't there and have no idea how much it all cost, I was only told it was expensive, whether that means per concert or the total of all the concerts over several years, I don't know.

But art for art's sake - I can understand questioning if that is what *church* is about, and if not then how much of a church's limited money and volunteer labor is appropriate to put into being a civic concert hall (or civic art gallery)?

One could have gourmet cooking classes in the kitchen and lectures about astronomy in the coffee room, and those are good things, but are they so closely related to the purpose of being a church, that church money should be put into advertising them to the general public?

Posted by churchgeek (# 5557) on :

Can we define what we mean by "evangelism" here? Does that mean going out to talk to people with the aim of converting them through words? Does it mean inviting people to church? Trying to gain new members?

Like St. Francis is credited with saying: Preach the Gospel at all times. Use words if necessary.

Social outreach programs are living out the Gospel. They are ends in themselves. They don't need to be justified by recruiting new members through them. And, if St. Francis is to be believed, they are also preaching the Gospel, even without words.

If a church is meant to nurture its members (and I think that is a huge part of what it should do as a community of faith), part of that will be helping to provide opportunities for members to live out their faith alongside other members. That makes it so much easier for them when they're out on their own, too. It's literally practicing your faith as a pianist practices the piano.

quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
"If we can just get them back in the building they'll join the church" is pretty much a non-starter. The first requirement is that the church is a place where the gospel is preached, believed, and lived out in members' lives.

Which is the point of a church, isn't it? If we're attracting people into an organization where the Gospel isn't preached, believed, and lived out in members' lives, then it's not a church they're being invited into.

quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
No church should 'put-on' special events with the specific purpose of snaring new adherents. They can, maybe should, put on special events and welcome people from the community to them but not with any purpose other than neighbourliness and providing hospitality.

Of course, you can advertise the other activities that are at the church during the special event - in the case of an organ recital you can hold it just before a service so that the person who's come to hear the music is sitting in the middle of people who've come for the service: they may stay on and may enjoy it.

But trying to be something you're not is a recipe for disaster.

Matthew 25:35 says 'I was hungry and you fed me; I was thirsty and you gave me water.' It does not say '..and you fed me, following up the food with an attempt to convert me'.

DING DING DING DING!!!!

At the cathedral where I used to work, we had a deacon who started up a ministry out of her home that involved distributing food bank food to families, and grew to distributing all kinds of things that people donated to her, like clothes, school supplies, diapers, you name it. There was even a foot doctor who donated his services there! She also started up a summer day camp, and now has a Friday evening social event for families with toddlers and preschoolers. She told me once, "We pray, we eat together - how is that not church?" Now, some may want there to be more explicit preaching involved, but the folks who go to that evening event probably know where they can go to listen to preachers. Getting together, praying together, eating together, and socializing is, on some level, being the Church, if it's done in Jesus' name. Same goes for other ministries and events churches can hold inside their buildings. It's that prized ancient virtue, hospitality.

quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
People join a church because they feel a need of something they think that particular church has. If they don't feel any need, there is no way they are going to join.

Moo

And sometimes they don't know they have a need until they step into a church, e.g. At the cathedral where I used to work, some people would come for some special event and find that the atmosphere spoke to them of a need they didn't know they had. But they may respond to it by showing up when the building's open but there aren't services - just to quietly pray or meditate. Or they might come to less formal events the church might offer (this particular church offers yoga on Tuesday nights). I think it's OK - if you have the resources and it doesn't detract from the Church's more central mission - for churches to engage the community at many different levels. It lets people participate at the degree they're comfortable and able to participate, nothing more, nothing less. And God can work with that.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
Belle Ringer: Apparently it cost money - extra pay for the organist for doing the extra work, music purchases, commercial advertising through newspapers and radio (this was pre-internet), another cleaning of the hall (post church and again post concert). I wasn't there and have no idea how much it all cost, I was only told it was expensive, whether that means per concert or the total of all the concerts over several years, I don't know.

I guess my childhood church organises organ concerts quite cheaply (no organs here in Brazil). I think they even make some money from it, by selling coffee and soft drinks.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

Thanks for clarifying, Belle Ringer ...

I think the difference between the instance you've given and the model I'm involved with is that the church buildings are hosting arts events - not putting their own money into advertising and so on ...

We tend to cover the costs of heating/cleaning etc but it has been known for churches to waive those as a contribution to the community in some way.

I'd also add that the prime motive of the concerts and things isn't evangelistic - it's simply part and parcel of being involved in the community.

If a church wants to put on, I dunno, a Gospel Music concert of something as part of its evangelistic activities then that's something else again and they should pay for it.

Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'd also add that the prime motive of the concerts and things isn't evangelistic - it's simply part and parcel of being involved in the community.

That's the model we're trying to work with, as well. Our building is a resource for the local community. We make it available (at low cost) to all sorts of local groups. We've started to host occasional Jazz concerts.

We're primarily looking to serve our area. But there is the additional benefit, in that the more we do this, the more people know we exist (we're not in the most obvious of locations) and will hopefully feel more comfortable coming into the building in the future.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

Gamaliel posts:

quote:
I often hear people saying, 'Wasn't it great to see so many people in a church building?' as if this is some kind of big deal in and of itself.

For many of the circles in which I move, being inside a church building for any reason whatsoever is a big deal. While most of my contacts are not hostile to churches (and some are), they have no clue what is in those buildings they pass every day. While I entirely agree with Gamaliel in that it is people who draw in other people, much more so than programmes, breaking through that first line of ignorance is a major feat.

There is also a segment of the population which, while believers, have their reasons to not want to be a regular part of a worshipping community. Arts events (and social outreach) are one of the ways they remain in contact with churches.

And we'll exclude, of course, those whose impression of services and church life is that derived from watching the blood-eating-cult on Tales of the City because.... well, where does one start?

Posted by womanspeak (# 15394) on :

I spent twelve years working voluntarily in my former church following early retirement in children, youth and family ministry. Our team's aim was to see more of these families in our town as members of our church not just to put bottoms on seats, but to grow strong Christian families.

The pre-schoolers and parents groups are still booming with a combination of solid teaching, prayer and great fun. We also provide support in times of trouble or just a listening ear. But our aim was evangelism.

The problem was our church services and Vicar were not welcoming and were not so slowly fading away in numbers. The remnant congregation was not prepared to be welcoming or to accommodate to the absent generation.

Change was not going to happen as the Vicar kept saying in his Annual report that we must not be overtly evangelistic. What was he scared of?

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by womanspeak:
The pre-schoolers and parents groups are still booming with a combination of solid teaching, prayer and great fun. We also provide support in times of trouble or just a listening ear. But our aim was evangelism.

...

the Vicar kept saying in his Annual report that we must not be overtly evangelistic. What was he scared of?

Two thoughts. 1. I grew up in a culture that strongly insisted religion is a private matter and it's wrong to discuss it in public. I recently heard someone say that, perhaps the vicar believes it.

2. I have mentioned before the book "the small church is different" by church consultant Lyle E Schaller. It's not about mega church or church in a community that constantly changes, like university areas. But the church whose congregation have known each other all their lives, they grew up in that church, they knew each others parents and dated each other and reared their kids together: that congregation resents newcomers, feeling invaded, fearing "they are taking our church away from us."

There are real positives in the "we all grew up together" church, including that if someone misses a Sunday, the others know it and someone goes to her house to check on her. That often doesn't happen in a church of strangers.

This free pdf describes some of the differences, like adding a Sunday to Advent so all the people who want to light an advent candle can.

Ask your search engine for "the small church is different" and you'll get lots of essays on the topic, such as this 20 page review of Schaller's book

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

Often, in more rural areas, the church will be the only large space suitable for concerts, etc. So of course it will continue to be used for such purposes. And why not.

We have occasionally combined a service with a concert to follow, eg. Evensong followed by an organ recital, or a classical music concert followed by candlelit Compline. Of course people are free to attend just the concert, but often they will come to both and seem to appreciate the opportunity to do so.

Posted by Cathscats (# 17827) on :

This week our village hall is out of commission. We have the drama club and the gardening club and the fiddlers meeting in the church. This is great because the church does not belong to the congregation but the community (OK, not in terms of who legally owns the building, but you know what I mean).
For four years now we have had a church-led but not overtly Christian toddlers group with intentional content for parents and toddlers together.. For most of that time it has been too large for our fairly small hall and has met in the church, which is flexible, having seats, not pews. We never thought that this would lead to bums on seats on a Sunday, but sometimes it has, and when it does, it is very clear that the kids, and to some extent their parents, feel very much at home, which is wonderful.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

I think this is a particularly Anglican view. And perhaps only an Anglican view in those countries where communities feel Anglican and instinctively turn to Anglican churches when necessary.

Many other denominations try to serve the community, of course, and are more or less able to do so, depending on their resources. But IME the income generated by letting a church building out to the community is just as much a benefit to the church as the use of the building is to the community. So let's not be too pious about it.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

Svitlana2

When people speak about events being held in the church but not run by the church I think you'll find nothing is charged for use of the building.

A church hall, fine, have a hire fee: the church itself? you have got to be kidding.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

Ah. That may be the case for the CofE, but not necessarily for other denominations.

Posted by seekingsister (# 17707) on :

I attended a church that didn't have its own building and for many years it rented the Episcopal Church building for use on Sunday afternoons and or midweek services. I would imagine in both the US and UK you have churches renting out their sanctuaries or chapels to other church groups, for a fee.

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

My US experience is that when one congregation rents from another, we don't make a difference between renting the main worship space (sanctuary, chapel, nave, whatever you want to call it) and any other rooms, including a hall. Rather the two churches will work out a schedule between them of who uses what and when. It's not like we say, "This bit is rent free, but that bit over there will cost you X." It's a package deal. And if you're only interested in the main worship space, that does still involve rent money. (although there are multi-church arrangements where no rent is paid, often ones where the guest church is considered to be a subset of the main church, and the difference between them is one of language.)

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

It seems fairly common for British Non-conformist churches to rent out their worship space for a fee. Most of them don't have a separate church hall, although they might have a few side rooms that are also available.

My understanding was that many churches have removed their pews to make their worship space more flexible - and rentable. This won't apply to churches in listed buildings, of which the CofE has many.

[ 19. November 2014, 12:34: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :

Our (UK Methodist) church has hosted various congregations on Sunday afternoons for a good few years. Usually these groups would not merge with the main congregation, previously for reasons of language, and latterly for reasons of worship style - currently a large African pentecostal group use it, main worship space, halls, the lot. We charge a fee - not only to cover heat and light, but also to deal with upkeep and other running costs. Otherwise, a small 'host' congregation would end up subsidising a large 'visitor' group - which seems odd, and wouldn't go on for very long without the former running out of money and closing.

A previous minister was quite nervous about the lack of denominational oversight for one or two of the visitor congregations, and the potential for harm (and. not least in her mind I think, 'scandal at *** Methodist Church' headlines). So far the only scandal has involved noise noise complaints.

I don't know how I feel about all this. A big part of me thinks f*ck it, close it and meet in a school. Buildings can be such a millstone.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

Of course there are subtle issues of power and money in all this: the host church is the one which lays down the rules, however the guest church may know that its rent is allowing the host to keep going.

FWIW, I can't think of any British churches which just "give" space to another church, except on the occasional "once-off" basis. Apart from anything else, the Trustees would expect some income from a regular rental - although a church might want to subsidize (say) a group of struggling asylum-seekers who want to worship in their language.

Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on :

For several years, we used to hold potluck suppers for the congregation (before evening service), as a way to be sure we stayed in contact, since the geographic spread of the congregation is about 90 km.

But we had a shift in attitude and opened this up to the "neighbours" (actually open to anyone, but advertised to the low-rent district which is around the church) Our congo runs about two dozen, but we are now serving supper for 60 - we've had to move to a community hall nearby, since our basement won't handle that number. The (secular) Kiwanis group let us have the hall at no cost, because we are "doing the right thing". Oh, and we make sure that anything left goes home with someone else.

No formal evangelisation, just being neighbourly. But this has allowed us to do helpful things as problems arise, up to the level of arranging counselling sessions with the priest as needed.

And ten of the "visitors" came to service after the last supper, with one couple talking about baptising their present (and near-future) children. The service itself was marvellous, since a couple of strong singing voices had turned up, and the whole atmosphere was comfortable and welcoming.

The suppers also put us in touch with a new organist, an unexpected benefit.

Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on :

The point that I'd like to add is that this is a building of relationship, not a one-off feel-good exercise.

There is only one person in the congregation that has any hesitation about the idea, and that relates more to her not wanting to drive after dark in the winter than it does to the supper.

Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :

That sounds really great, HB. I think our building distracts us utterly from 'doing the right thing' as you say, and the growth (I don't mean numerical) and relationships which can be blessed through all that. I'm starting to sense our pile of bricks and concrete as an active curse.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:
I'm starting to sense our pile of bricks and concrete as an active curse.

Welcome to the club!

[ 21. November 2014, 08:40: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posted by Leprechaun (# 5408) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:

I don't know how I feel about all this. A big part of me thinks f*ck it, close it and meet in a school. Buildings can be such a millstone.

I feel exactly that expletive about meeting in a school. Grass is always greener and all that!

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:
That sounds really great, HB. I think our building distracts us utterly from 'doing the right thing' as you say, and the growth (I don't mean numerical) and relationships which can be blessed through all that. I'm starting to sense our pile of bricks and concrete as an active curse.

I once spoke to a clergyman who, in a previous parish, had been saddled with an ugly and unpleasant Victorian church that cost a packet to maintain. One evening he got a telephone call from a parishoner. "I'm sorry to bother you Father, but it looks like someone is trying to burn the church down".
"Why on earth did you ring me, rather than just leaving him to it?"

Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :

Leprechaun - there's a Methodist church near you crying out for someone to take minutes for its property committee... [Big Grin]

[ 21. November 2014, 14:44: Message edited by: mark_in_manchester ]

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
It seems fairly common for British Non-conformist churches to rent out their worship space for a fee. Most of them don't have a separate church hall, although they might have a few side rooms that are also available.

My understanding was that many churches have removed their pews to make their worship space more flexible - and rentable. This won't apply to churches in listed buildings, of which the CofE has many.

Most churches of a certain age have a seperate church hall. This helped them get round the objections to women's preaching etc. A women in the pulpit was preaching and not on. A woman in church hall was giving a talk and that was fine.

All the churches I've ever been too rented out rooms in either the church building or the seperate church hall. For many of them, the extra income helps keep them going. None of them rented out the Sanctuary. The only ones I know of who do that are some of the newer, warehouse churches.

And back to the OP ... The only churches I know of who've managed to grow successfully are ones who set up programmes that were designed to bring people into the church without frightening them. The ones that work best are the ones that meet a need such as toddlers.

Add to the mix congregation members who were willing to hustle in build relationships with the people who came to those groups and elsewhere in their community - and were willing to talk about their faith and invite them to church.

The congregation also need to be willing to welcome the newcomers and change in order to accomodate them.

The final piece is a leadership who supported and facilitated that.

As others have pointed out, praying for newcomers whilst being unwilling to do anything to make them welcome or even go and find them ain't going to do much!

Tubbs

[ 21. November 2014, 15:13: Message edited by: Tubbs ]

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
Most churches of a certain age have a seperate church hall. This helped them get round the objections to women's preaching etc. A women in the pulpit was preaching and not on. A woman in church hall was giving a talk and that was fine.

All the churches I've ever been too rented out rooms in either the church building or the seperate church hall. For many of them, the extra income helps keep them going. None of them rented out the Sanctuary. The only ones I know of who do that are some of the newer, warehouse churches.

I'm sure it's partly regional, because we seem to have different experiences. Thinking about the Methodist churches in my city, I'd say that only a minority now have separate halls, although they might have had them originally. Many halls have long since been sold off, and some of the newer Methodist buildings have their hall incorporated in the main structure.

However, Methodist (and probably Baptist, etc.) churches in comfortable smaller towns and semi-rural areas are perhaps more likely to have the space, people and finances to maintain a separate hall. My sense is that (in England) local communities in such areas are relatively 'reachable', and won't just see the church building as a space that they've paid to use.

[ 21. November 2014, 17:24: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

This past weekend our church had its annual Holiday Boutique. Sunday morning a woman and her 11-year-old daughter came to church and said they'd been to the Boutique the day before and wanted to know more about our church. Our Church School director came up just then so we introduced her and she talked the daughter into going to Church School as well.

I hope we'll see them again next week.

Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :

quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
No church should 'put-on' special events with the specific purpose of snaring new adherents. They can, maybe should, put on special events and welcome people from the community to them but not with any purpose other than neighbourliness and providing hospitality.

If you are thinking of special musical or artistic events, far more can be said for them. See The Church and the City, by Msgr. M. Francis Mannion. The heavenly city is a place of Truth, Goodness, and Beauty. Our earthly cities are often full of lies (Babel), slavery (Rameses), and ugliness (Philistia). The church, as an outpost of the heavenly city in the earthly city, has a mission to project all three of the contrasting transcendental virtues.

Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
I once spoke to a clergyman who, in a previous parish, had been saddled with an ugly and unpleasant Victorian church that cost a packet to maintain. One evening he got a telephone call from a parishoner. "I'm sorry to bother you Father, but it looks like someone is trying to burn the church down".
"Why on earth did you ring me, rather than just leaving him to it?"

Given the insured value at 2.4 million we've joked about the benefits of putting a match to even our rather nice, if badly in need of renovation, Edwardian building. Of course with the amount of damp in the building one would need a lot of petrol...

[ 28. November 2014, 06:34: Message edited by: Arethosemyfeet ]

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

I occasionally fantasised about setting fire to my old church. If we could have pulled that off things would have been very different!

[Mad]

Posted by Barefoot Friar (# 13100) on :

I am by no means an expert on this, as I'm slowly learning myself as I go along. However, I've come to realize a couple things. First, I think that building genuine relationships is key. People bring people (Lambchopped?) is true. The key is to not make them feel like you just tried to befriend them to get them to come to church. You have to truly care about them, and they have to know that you care about them. I think a certain number of these relationships will never bring anyone to church, but I think it's an important first step.

Second, being a positive, known entity in the community is important. If either one of my churches closed tomorrow, would anyone notice? Would anyone care? This is where outreach comes into play. Not only are you doing what Jesus told us to do in Matthew 25, but also you are showing the community that you're there, that you're alive, that you're not a bunch of weirdos, and that you as a group care about the community. Doing things like inside out Bible school, sponsoring after school care programs, community food and healthcare programs, even concerts, 5K runs, and so forth are all ways to get the church's name out there and let people know you're still alive and kicking. Do things in the parking lot sometimes, out where people can see you. The Episcopal church in downtown Huntsville, Church of the Nativity, sponsors a farmer's market that meets every Thursday afternoon in the summer and early fall. It happens in their parking lot. They don't make a big deal out of it, but church members are usually there smiling and chatting and talking to newcomers, and if someone asks for a restroom they show you into the church and make sure you find it easily.

Finally, be warmly welcoming but not pushy when people do turn up for worship. I can't tell you how many churches have visitors show up and immediately start trying to get them to come to Sunday School, join the choir, and serve on a committee. I'm not exaggerating.

Have people who will strike up a conversation, and if the visitors aren't from your particular faith tradition, have them offer to sit with their new friends and help them navigate the service (this is mainly pointed at liturgical churches, but every church has its unspoken, unwritten rules). Then if your church is the eating out type, have them invite the visitors to lunch after church next week. When they show up next week, introduce them to new friends who will invite them out the week after. (That's something my wife and I are trying, and it seems to be working.)

There's no magic formula. There's no book or system that will grow any church, guaranteed. Trying to replicate what another church does without finding out why it works in that particular community's culture is pointless -- even harmful!

I think most of all be open to doing things that seem risky on the outside but that are actually the Holy Spirit leading into new areas, new ministries, new relationships, and new situations.

Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Barefoot Friar:

Finally, be warmly welcoming but not pushy when people do turn up for worship. I can't tell you how many churches have visitors show up and immediately start trying to get them to come to Sunday School, join the choir, and serve on a committee. I'm not exaggerating.

I know I'm probably an exception but when I've moved and consequently started attending a new church I've always been pleased to be included straight away. It's worth being aware of the distinction between those attending church for the first time in a while (or at all) and those simply new to the area.

Posted by Barefoot Friar (# 13100) on :

Oh, I don't mean to not include people. Definitely include people. But there is a point at which it goes beyond being including into being desperate, and that's the line that shouldn't be crossed.

I had a specific church in mind when I wrote that. One Sunday a visitor came in and they were pushing all their programs plus asking him to join the church and serve on the trustees. He never came back.

I just think being pushy and desperate is going too far.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0