"Transformational Church" book review

In the hopes of discovering the reasons for the decline of churches in the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) a research team from Lifeway set out to interview several churches from varying denominational backgrounds that had, in their opinion, experienced some kind of growth contrary to the current downward trend. The numbers were crunched and the research concluded as of March 29, 2010. The result was a wealth of data and the encapsulation of such in the book “Transformational Church”.

This book is co-authored by Ed Stetzer and Thom Rainer. Ed is the President of Lifeway Research and has co-authored and authored many previous books such as “Comeback Churches”, “Viral Churches”, and “Planting Missional Churches”. Thom is the President and CEO of Lifeway Christian Resources and is the co-author and author of books such as “Breakout Churches”, “Simple Church”, and “Breaking the Missional Code”.

The book in review is a total of 239 pages with the last 7 pages detailing the elements of how they accumalted the research data and the criteria for interviewing churches, Pastors, and church members. These churches were listed throughout the book as Transformational Churches or TC’s.

Before even knowing the book existed, my Senior Pastor introduced our church to the DVD discussion guide which presents the elements of the book in a table talk fashion. The DVD itself is designed to be used among the leaders of the church but our church reviewed it together over several Sunday evenings. I had already taken some notes on the DVD but decided to base my review from the book once I had it in my hands.

Before starting let me note what I believe should be the biblical placement of any “research”. First and foremost, the Bible is THE authoritative source. Nothing else comes first as it reveals to us the mind of God and that which He has intended for us to have. Any source that follows is subjective to the Bible and should never be held anywhere close to level of reliability as God’s holy, infallible, inerrant, inspired Word. All things are viewed through the lens of the Bible.

Secondary is the placement of tradition. Tradition can, and often does, become a dangerous territory since some use it on the same authoritative level as the Word. The Roman Catholic religion is notorious for this; which is one of the many reasons that Catholicism is not Christian. Tradition has a subjective place in how we interact in our church settings. Some of these elements are present in our churches today without most of us even realizing it.

Tertiary in this listing is that of research. Research can help us gauge the temperature of our congregations to better understand on a more distinct level what we might be missing. Research can also help in understanding the secular, lost world around us. This is no way means that we are to cater how we evangelize, present the Word, or follow the commands of Christ in relation to how the world “feels” about a particular area. Research is helpful but in no way authoritative nor should it affect the doctrinal elements of Christianity and how we present salvation in Christ.

The book was chocked full of good information and it is evident that much work went into their research. However, even among the good elements I found several areas that were either contradictory or overtly pragmatic to the point that they should not have been included in this material. Some included quotes from Pastors of the churches surveyed that were coming close to unloving due to the lack of emphasis on presenting the Gospel. What I will attempt to do in the remainder of this review is highlight some of the good, the bad, and the contradictory elements to give you a general overview of the material.

The first thing that impressed be about this book was found on page 3. “We, the body of Christ, are God’s chosen method to deliver the message of transformation to our neighbors both in the local community and around the world. Delivering this message is our mission” (emphasis added). Understanding that “transformation” means the Gospel I immediately thought “HOMERUN”. It seemed the book had gotten off to a great start by highlighting the primacy of presenting the Gospel to the world vice just “doing church”. Such was continued through the first two and a half chapters. But on page 36 I read “When people arrived for worship, they knew something great was going to happen”. This was in reference to the worship services as the TC’s they had interviewed and brought my reading to a halt in order to ponder the quote.

While this may at first not seem like much of an issue, the problem is that it creates a misunderstanding of the purpose of worship. This is not a recent trend but has become the central fallacy in worship for many over the past few decades. That is that worship must produce a “charge” or sense of rejuvenation in those who attend and/or participate. Many come to church as a recharge for the week and preparation for the week ahead. They do not understand that worship is something you do in adoration to God not something God does in appreciation of you. Later in the book the authors did highlight the importance of remembering that worship is not about “you” but this was in stark contrast to the statement on page 36. More will be commented on their research in the area of worship later.

On page 46 I read “...a genuine missional impulse is a sending rather than an attritional one” which was a quote from another author. The statement was directly targeted atto debunk the idea of evangelism being nothing more than a passing invite to one’s local church. Again, another important nugget of information they voiced, or at least another author they quoted voiced. But just above this quote was a story of a TC that I found troubling and honestly offensive.

In this TC, the Pastor noticed that his congregation was of a certain skin color and their immediate neighborhood was not reflective of what was in the church. He believed those in his church should reflect what he considered to be the diversity of those outside the church.

First, let us take note that “race” is a Westernized term which many have used to segregate others and themselves based solely on appearance. It developed from Darwinian evolution and should be completely thrown out of our vocabulary. Unfortunately what most fail to realize is that people of similar appearance can have totally different cultural backgrounds. The Pastor then attempted to “level” the diversity in his church presupposing that other people didn’t attend because no one of their own appearance was an active part of that church. So why is that offensive? First, it ignores that fact that some people prefer to congregate with other believers of like background, not color. Second, it ignores the sovereignty of God and supposes that if the church is not diverse in skin color, culture, or other categorical areas then they must forcibly make themselves that way. Trying to force one’s idea of diversity is just as bad as trying to segregate a gathering. Reflection was a theme I found a few times in the book. They believed that every church should directly reflect the culture outside its doors.

Several other times in the book it is noted that missions, or evangelism, is about going outside the church walls to the lost and dying world that surrounds us. “Inviting people to church and cleaning up the church are noble endeavors, but that’s not what being missional is all about” (p. 67). And elsewhere concerning the focus of the churches leadership it is said they “…understand(s) that the church exists for the mission of God, and God gives leaders to help churches focus on the mission” (p. 75). Yet examples from TC’s showed their inconsistency in this line of thought.

Page 109 details the way a TC tries to cater to the desires of visitors rather than being biblically minded. “Early in the planting process they offered a Sunday lunch opportunity at a local restaurant. Discount coupons were offered as regular attendees invited new people to lunch. Each table at the restaurant had someone from Watershed (Church) to engage the new informally in conversations and to help connect them to next steps in the church”. Then on page 111 “Cincinnati Vineyard paid people who were not Christians to experience Sunday morning worship and answer a few important questions in writing” (emphasis added). Sandwiched in between these two pages the authors say “…the cross of Jesus Christ and spiritual things will be uncomfortable to some people who are far from God no matter what we do”. Aside from the fact that Scripture says that Christ is a “Rock-of-offense” (Romans 9:33) and not just Someone who makes unbelievers uncomfortable, there is a great inconsistency.

They say one thing, but the churches they have dubbed as TC are acting contrary to both biblical principles and the majority of the writing of the authors. It would seem that they are more bent on presenting the research and “successes” of the TC’s than anything else.

As I moved further in the book they introduced elements from these TC’s that were notably important. Prayer was a theme that seemed rather prevalent. This is an often overlooked area in our assemblies today. I struggle myself with the discipline of prayer and see the need for more emphasis from the pulpit for congregational prayer as well as individual. Some TC’s gave varying examples of how they integrated the importance of prayer. Some held prayer meetings before each Sunday morning service, others throughout the week. Some used prayer walking, which entails simply walking through their communities praying over certain areas as they came upon them. This is a relatively new idea and is still debated among some. I personally fall in the category of believing that it is not necessary to be physically within viewing distance of something or someone to pray for them effectively. What I fear is that prayer walking can become a way for some churches to advertise themselves as they hope the community will see them during their trek. It could then be more about being seen that being obedient.

Space was dedicated to detail more of the worship mindset they had already spoken of. Several good points were again brought out. “Blended worship provides equal opportunity to offend everybody” and “Worship should be what unifies the body of Christ” (p. 164). But this again seemed in contrast to some of what they had said, as I have already noted. Further in the book they did not differentiate between the worship service and Sunday School/Bible study. Two particular pages made this very mistake.

On page 188 I read “…church sanctuaries are designed the same way…seats on an ascending upward floor so that everyone feels close to the action…has an unintentional side effect…implies that the action is on the platform, and the people in the seats are there to cheer and enjoy the game”. If this is speaking of worship, they presuppose more than they realize. In Nehemiah 8:4, Ezra read aloud from the Law as he stood atop a wooden construct with the chief priests. Elevation in reading the Word of God is not simply a construct of tradition or pragmatism but of biblical principle. Page 189 digs further into the pit of misconception: “People need to move from sitting in rows to sitting in circles. Sitting in rows you are watching someone else using their gifts”. If this means the worship service then this negates all others who may be involved in worship such as the choir, worship team, ushers, Deacons, greeters, etc. Even among Bible studies and Sunday Schools there are varying differences but they each require involvement that is different from the congregational worship service. The worship service is not about disengaging oneself and simple observance but about joining other believers in corporately praising God. This happens through praying, singing, tithing, and even intent listening to the preaching of the Word.

Hitting again on the point of evangelism, the books speaks of the element of engaging the lost. “TC’s place an emphasis on social ministry as far as it serves the purpose of sharing the Gospel” and “Although they want their local church to grow in attendance they understand that the mission is greater” (p. 203). “Engaging the lost, winning the lost, and maturing believers to repeat the process was the pervasive mission in the TC’s…” (p. 207). But as they noted false ideas of evangelism, “…Christians in North America had the luxury of depending on attractive churches and programs to be their proxy evangelist to our culture” (p. 206), they did nothing to denounce or rebuke such.

With its great points and emphasis on the importance of evangelism, it still missed an important principle. With its highlighting of congregational worship, the authors were still unwilling to draw a line between seeker-sensitive and the true purpose of worship. With an underlining of prayer, pragmatism was still more prevalent than they were willing to admit.

There are unbiblical methods of evangelism that utilize man-centered principles rather that God-ordained ones. Seeker-sensitivity disregards the fact that Scripture reveals there is only one Seeker to whom we are to remain sensitive (Luke 19:10). Prayer is vital to a healthy Christian walk and a health church but should never be supplanted by developing methods based solely on the outcome we desire. What the authors sought to do by interviewing these churches was a noble task but in my opinion fell flat on its face. The research did provide some vital insight into the priorities and principles of different churches but the direct quotes from some of them revealed that although they answered questions one way their methods revealed where their real desires were.

Each of these TC’s boasted in engaging their local communities and most were adamant in doing so with the Gospel, yet nothing at all was said of their evangelistic principles. In fact, it was noted that most of them did not believe in regular evangelism training. They instead relied upon the people sharing the Gospel in their own ways. What are the repercussions of doing this? First, without going to the Bible to find God’s principles of seeking the lost, churches can and will develop numerous unbiblical versions of the Gospel resulting in false conversions and disillusioned parishioners. The idea of “you do it your way and I’ll do it mine” has been the approach many denominations have taken to evangelism for some time. In doing so success has always been measured by number of supposed conversions, even though the numbers themselves never pan out after many professing converts are found missing from local congregations.

While the authors were apparently slighted towards those who have been critical of the local church they failed to ask if any of their critiques were valid. Instead they simply sought to find pragmatic elements from these TC’s rather than ask if the principles they utilized were biblical. With so much within the pages that were meaty and applicable I simply found too many contradictions. It seemed as though every time they came close to hitting the proverbial nail on the head they either tapped too lightly or missed it all together. I can only recommend this book to those who are seeking to find the direction of the latest trends and the operating elements of differing churches. What good I found in this book was unfortunately overshadowed by the actual practices of the TC’s they lifted up.

If we start with the Bible as our foundation, while we may disagree in method, we cannot debate in biblical principle. What we find in the early church is a body of believers seeking to minister to one another, employing their spiritual gifts, worshipping daily and congregationally, reaching the lost the way Jesus did, and glorifying God in it all. While I do believe learning from other churches can be helpful, we must return to the Bible and not think that the old ways of church are irrelevant simply because we think we know better. Transformation comes by the hand of God not by the methods of man.