I was just having a conversation about this today with someone. I think your external processing is attempting to reach at what "success" looks like in ministry, because, even though you began with a theory of change, you started talking about numbers, growth, and quantifiable metrics. I think you are beginning to see the weakness in some of our assumptions and frameworks for ministry. I would argue we need to stop using certain words and frameworks like "success" and "effectiveness," and instead look to "cultivation" and "faithfulness." A theory of change that relies upon an individual or team of "effective/anointed" leaders would lend itself to believing God can only work through certain individuals and circumstances, which is clearly not true. Yet, he does use individuals from time to time to initiate radical change. I think having a robust theology and theory of change that incorporate the Word, Sacrament, and others is key.
Theory of change: input + Holy Spirit = outcome (or, what means does the Holy Spirit work through in order to create an outcome). I think the two questions would be: 1) are we looking to the right outcome as a denomination of what "success" means, 2) are we sure that the input we're suggesting and spending so much time talking about is a biblical input or are we simply mimicking other church growth methods which were imitations of corporate leadership culture? I agree in needing Word, sacrament, and the church. To which I would say that we need to begin asking the denomination to talk more about these, teach about them, pray about them, and celebrate them rather than belaboring leadership development and growth in numbers as the input and outcome of the church. But unless there's conversation pushing for this change in dialogue, why would change come about for the denomination?
I was just having a conversation about this today with someone. I think your external processing is attempting to reach at what "success" looks like in ministry, because, even though you began with a theory of change, you started talking about numbers, growth, and quantifiable metrics. I think you are beginning to see the weakness in some of our assumptions and frameworks for ministry. I would argue we need to stop using certain words and frameworks like "success" and "effectiveness," and instead look to "cultivation" and "faithfulness."
A theory of change that relies upon an individual or team of "effective/anointed" leaders would lend itself to believing God can only work through certain individuals and circumstances, which is clearly not true. Yet, he does use individuals from time to time to initiate radical change. I think having a robust theology and theory of change that incorporate the Word, Sacrament, and others is key.
Theory of change: input + Holy Spirit = outcome (or, what means does the Holy Spirit work through in order to create an outcome). I think the two questions would be: 1) are we looking to the right outcome as a denomination of what "success" means, 2) are we sure that the input we're suggesting and spending so much time talking about is a biblical input or are we simply mimicking other church growth methods which were imitations of corporate leadership culture? I agree in needing Word, sacrament, and the church. To which I would say that we need to begin asking the denomination to talk more about these, teach about them, pray about them, and celebrate them rather than belaboring leadership development and growth in numbers as the input and outcome of the church. But unless there's conversation pushing for this change in dialogue, why would change come about for the denomination?