Book Review: Simple Church

This was a book I read because it was required for the one-week class I'm about to attend. I wasn't sure why the professor was so adamant that we read it before we attend the upcoming church conference (on change - the one I posted on below). Having finished the book last night, I understand his insistence...
Simple church presents a somewhat radical, yet decidedly simple concept: the churches that are the most "simple" are the most effective.

So first of all, what do the authors mean by "simple"? They argue that the fundamental purpose of a church is to make disciples. They are careful to note that it's the LORD who carries out this "making like Christ" in our lives, but also propose that the local church is responsible for creating an environment where this is most likely to happen. So a simple church (by their definition) is "designed around a straightforward and strategic process that moves people through the stages of spiritual growth".

So what do the authors mean by "effective"? They use Sunday morning worship service attendance (and its growth or lack thereof) as the marker for effective. While this sounds somewhat suspect, they offer (in an appendix) a rationale: "Research indicates that people only remain in worship services over time as they are moved to greater levels of commitment. Measuring the church's annual average weekly worship attendance measures the ability of the church to attach people, not just attract them".

In a nutshell, they maintain that churches should define what a disciple of Jesus "looks like" in three or four ways, then structure the church's programs around these. For example, if your church believes that disciples of Jesus 1) love the LORD, 2) love each other, and 3) love the lost, then you structure everything around moving people through that chain. So your Sunday morning worship service becomes the primary vehicle for "love the LORD". You may have small groups that encourage "love each other", and perhaps outreach teams (of varying kinds) the foster "love the lost". If a present church program doesn't fit this paradigm, you kill it (either slowly or quickly - depends on your circumstances). If a new program is suggested that doesn't fit the paradigm, you kill it.

To otherwise, they contend, is to be "complex". Complexity pulls people in lots of directions. Complexity fosters an environment where church leaders compete for the attendance of their flock. Complexity dilutes effectiveness because it lacks clarity. Sadly, most churches fit this description.

On to my take:

1.) There's something about the "simple" concept that resonates with me. As the authors point out, "simple" is being marketed to us all the time - precisely because it resonates with people in a too-busy world. There's also something inherently postmodern about the idea (maybe pre-modern, in reality). So creating simplicity in focusing on disciple making within the context of the local church seems like a great idea.

2.) The book is decidedly modern in its philosophy. Facts and figures abound - the result of their research that shows a "highly significant relationship" between this or that.... Also, there's lots of talk about doing ministry in an "excellent" way. They are seemingly very supportive of the uber-church phenomenon. Sometimes they even sound borderline consumerist.

3.) The book is most certainly Seeker friendly - and as you know by now, I'm not a big Seeker guy!

I'm trying to decide how a Missional guy like me can make use of the concepts in Simple Church. I'm convinced that their fundamental assertions fit - churches should be actively fostering an environment that encourages the disciple making process, and "simple" resonates with culture in a counter-cultural way. Just what this means for Missional I haven't quite wrapped my head around yet...

Your take?

Hatushili