Granted, theologically he is in error, even when it comes to a lot of faith focused things he brings up on his show, he is in error… but error or not, he is able to get a lot of people to believe his message. Even more so, he gets people to spread that message, and then even more astounding, he gets folks to volunteer to help out with getting the message out there. Whats perhaps the most incredible, is he gets *orthodox Christians to jump right in and pretty much serve as behind the scenes Mormom missionaries too. While I disagree with Glen pretty much across the board, I have much admiration for what he has been able to accomplish within the domain of evangelism.

The sad part is of course that he is in serious error… and perhaps the saddest part is all of the innocent orthodox Christian bystanders who go right along with the flow and thus cause said errors to propagate, so say nothing of reducing the faith density within their congregations and potentially causing younger ones to stumbles. In a lot of ways, it seems the gift of discernment is no where to be found when it comes to the pew.

Brannon Howse has some thoughts on such…

Many American Christians will allow their commitment to reclaiming the country, reclaiming Congress, lowering taxes, and defeating the progressives trump their commitment to the Biblical mandate declared in 2 Corinthians 6 as well as the mandate of 2 Corinthians 10:3-5 which commands Christians to expose every high and lofty thing lifted up against the principles of the Lord.

American Christians should not and cannot rate our success on whether or not we return our country and culture to its Christian roots. Our success or failure must be based on whether or not we have been faithful servants of the one and only true God and have earnestly contended for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3).

I remember one fellow a ways back stating that Glenn Beck needs to be upfront when he is promoting Mormon doctrine as contrasted with his politics and entertainment… and its like whoa, are you kidding me? Apart from whether such would even be possible, it would be like asking an orthodox Christian to selectively turn off their witness, to say nothing of infringing on their first amendment rights.

Whats needed is personal responsibility, for folks to get back to the Bibles, to be like the Berean dudes, to get gung ho on the local church. Spiritual food is not found on talk radio, but it is found in church, it is found in scripture. Whats needed is real Biblical literacy, all the way from scripture, to the head, and to the heart, and from that comes discernment… and discernment impacts not only how best to filter talk radio, but has untold benefits throughout nearly all aspects of life.

* Note the use of the small o… orthodox Christianity by my definition, would include all those who ascribe to the Apostles creed and the trinity as best demonstrated in the Nicene Creed. Thus Catholics, mainline protestants, other protestants, most non-denominational folks etc.

35Jesus went through all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing every disease and sickness. 36When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. 37Then he said to his disciples, “The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few. 38Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field.”

So… whats the deal, why are there so many pastors without churches? Ultimately, it comes down to money! Everyone and his brother has to scarf some or a lot, whether it be $200K charges for seminary, or $40K/year for the whippiest audio visual sermon tool ever, or fifty kazillion for the latest and greatest worship building, or parishioners holding back an average of 98% for themselves.

Today is a far cry from when Dr Jame’s Glasse of Lancaster Seminary ~40 years ago, suggested that 10 families could support 1 pastor at an equal standard of living of their own, such that over 80% of that pastors time could be devoted to extended ministries outside their church. Its a far cry from ~100+ years ago, where the local churches saw the need, and banded together to build and run schools, hospitals, universities, and seminaries, such that even the poor could have access. If anything, today its like 100 families are barely supporting a pastor, and thats after they’ve turned their hospitals and schools into profit centers, and or sold them in order to keep their doors open.

When one considers, that 1 person may do the job of what 20 people used to do and is paid more, albeit not 20x more, and that many, but not all goods are a tiny fraction of what they cost both 45 and 100 years ago based upon CPI… the churches lack of funding makes even less sense. Of course, when one digs into things, its not really money, as much as it is priorities… Wants have been turned into needs, and such combined with easy credit has made a fortune for others, but also shifts the average Joe into a mode of scarcity, rather than prosperity. Wants have been turned into needs schedule wise such that the last 3 congregations I was at over the last 20 years are experiencing across the board nearly 50% less weekly attendance, but the same or greater number of members.

So… how to dig out of this… long term wise, it will require a reprioritization on the part of all parties, and thats not going to be pleasant, nor of a short time duration, but is inevitable for a number of reasons. I think the church will come out much stronger, but likely I will kick the bucket before such occurs.

Digging out of this short term wise will take a lot of pastoring… not just sermons on Sunday, baptisms, hospital visitations, marriages, and funerals. Their absolutely will be no lack of meaningful work for the pastorate, the issue really is how to fund them, and thats going to be hard. If an expense doesn’t further the Gospel, its gotta go on the side of the church… and likewise the congregational members also need to start thinking that way as well when it comes to their priorities. It is going to require a lot of creativity* and sacrifice on the part of all parties, and that wont be painless either, as a lot of status quo traditions created in the last 50-100 years, are either going to change, or get wiped out entirely.

In a lot of ways, the seemingly surplus of pastors is similar to the recession’s impact on the Christian music business which I blogged about last year. There are a kazillion of Christian musicians out there… many of whom are absolutely clueless on the business side of things, and cash runs away from them like no tomorrow. Yet, for those who see unmet needs, and can work towards filling them with creativity and careful stewardship of the few remaining resources, this could be a time of wondrous growth. The same I believe applies to a vast number of ministries and the massive real need for pastors. Matthew was correct, the harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few.

*Creativity is not just a word to say there are no answers… but that said answers are not readily apparent. Case in point, in some areas of the country, not all that long ago, pastors would not have any vehicle expenses beyond gasoline, being car dealers included their pastor in their rotation of demonstrator vehicles. (much to the chagrin of the dealers insurance companies).

Most certainly online sermons can foster greater connectivity, especially for those who cannot attend, either due to distance, schedule, or mobility concerns. In addition, the ability to hear a sermon again from a retention standpoint can be a really huge deal. Yet another aspect, is that a sermon can remain online for many years, and it can reach much further than just the original congregation it was preached to on a given Sunday. A great example of this is at Sarah Laughed, where Dylan blogs the entire lectionary… case in point, from back in 2007.

Like many things though, providing online sermons sound great in theory, but in practice one may find the number of readers, listeners, or viewers to be a very small number. In a lot of cases, the numbers are so small, that unless the process to put the sermon online is incredibly painless, such efforts are often very short lived.

Another issue is the ability for hearers to provide feedback. For sure, feedback can provide a lot of value, it can as the newworshipold guys said, allow a far off college student to interact with her home congregation. It can provide for more personalized and directed challenge to specific parishoners. It can also serve as an easy way for parishoners to encourage the preacher.

However, feedback is not without problems… you can run into things which can freak out your congregation. You can run into things where folks have a vastly different worldview. For some examples of such… Brant Hanson, with a post entitled, If Jesus had a Blog provides some excellent examples…. plus take a look at the live comment stream too. On the other hand, through all the messyness, there are some really cool things going on too.

There is also the issue of cost and witness to consider. There are many great free services for text, for audio, and for video… but you give up screen space for advertising which may not always be appropriate. There are premium accounts, where upon you pay for usage and storage space which give you more control, but alas, some of them can get pretty spendy fast.

Lastly is the issue of how comfortable the pastor is, which I touched on briefly at oldworshipnew. Most pastors dont want to become celebrities… but this can happen, if not globally, it can happen regionally. Its the sort of thing which needs to be considered initially, and also periodically along the way. Obviously there is a balance, the more views, the more folks are reached, which is very good… but then the potential for pastor icon status can also be a concern,

Ultimately, I think online sermons are well worthwhile… but it is important to consider the extra workload, how one will handle feedback, cost etc. Its not really the thing to jump into without at least considering some of the potential difficulties, and figuring out a game plan as to how best to deal with them.

One thing somewhat fascinating is the correlation between open comments, and clergy… Its a little disturbing as to why lay leaders while leaning the same way as clergy, often did not have as strong a position as clergy and open criteria. Or… it might mean that within the open criteria, more clergy participated than others, or more specifically if I read things correct, more female clergy based upon the gender ratio?

The answers amongst lay leaders are astounding. Picking just one, the ELCA has incredibly educational resources… yet only 32% of lay leaders said yes, ELCA Christians were unique. Then again, it likely depends on how one reads the question too, ie, I’m looking at beliefs and theology, others may be looking at how Christians love God, how they love others perhaps?

Changes in the religious climate / culture of American Society as far as having a negative impact stood out as a big deal…. but its the sort of question that creates more questions than answers. Is it that society has less economic resources? Is it that society is going more lukewarm? Is it that society is more into Loving Jesus, but not so much the church? Its hard to tell from this rather wide ranging question.

Children and adult education are felt nearly equal as to importance based upon question 10b and 10c survey data…. but my experience in a number of churchs show the emphasis is mostly on childrens edu in alignment with the priority results of question 11. This disparity depending upon how the questions are asked is interesting.

Pastoral education seems to be dumped to the Churchwide body… no wonder there is little local support and pastors get stuck with massive debt on graduating seminary… it wasnt like that years ago.

Ecumenical relationships seem to be again be a churchwide thing and within pulpit and altar fellowship, thats appropriate… but unity also starts in the pew.

Age distribution seems a bit scary, over 75% of the respondents were over 45, and only a tiny number under 24.

Another oddity is the following dealing with connectivity to the wider body. Feeding the hungry, and helping with the poor ranked very high as priorities amongst those who felt strongly connected to the wider body… yet amongst those who were less connected did not rank feeding the hungry and helping the poor as highly, rather they replaced such ranking levels with teaching the confessions and traditional Bible teaching. Its almost a direct reverse correlation… The survey presents the following as a possibility.

It may be the case that a significant number of lay and clergy respondents feel disconnected from the wider church because they believe it is too involved in issues they would address differently or not at all.

I tend to think the answer is likely differently, moreso than not at all.. wow, there is a massive disconnect somewhere.

As far as the clergy/lay leader disparity… this is massively counter productive, as mixed messages are likely being sent. They need to all be on the same team, not one going this way, and another that. How can the congregation be on board, if the lay leaders are sending mixed messages, in some cases counter to the pastor? Pastor Joelle presented an interesting blog on pastoral authority or the lack there of… I think such likely plays a significant role in this.

.

My personal experiences with a multitude of non-churched folks from any number of denominations seems to bear that out as well. Many folks absolutely love Jesus… but the church, not so much, or for some, their is absolute outrage, and hate for the church. In other case, some really odd practices show up, more than a few times, and in more than a few denominations, I’ve seen parents drop off their kids, and then retreat to the car, when upon they are reading the Bible… seeking Christ, but totally blowing off the body of believers in some cases by less than 20 meters!

Academically, believers know that the body of believers is a busted up broken mess, afterall, it is made up of hypocritical sinners, both lay and clergy. We all fall short of the glory of God, and non has all their ducks in a row. In the heart though… there is hope, that within the body of believers, faith, hope, and love exist… that its not just an eternal thing with Christ after we kick the bucket, but that within the church on earth, faith, hope, and love can be found, albeit imperfectly… and of course imperfectly, at least in the human realm ranges from minor, to incredibly major soul damaging, or possibly even destroying actions.

How should we as individuals respond?

The big issue is not that the church is imperfect, but more so how we respond to said imperfections. Five common approaches which I believe to be in error are denial, passivity, perpetual church shopping, abandonment, and failure to take responsibility. I wouldn’t necessarily say all are in error all the time. Certainly in the event of massive trauma, such approaches may be the only way of coping. Lets look at each one.

Deny

We’ve all seen the denial approach, ie the church, the pastor, the believers etc can do no wrong… and if accused, and even convicted, the stance taken is such was man’s error in judgment. In other cases, denial is advocated by well meaning Christians with a “well tough for you, but Christ commands us not to forsake the assembly, so suck it up” approach.

Go Passive

Passivity is a common approach, its pretty easy to appear not forsaking the assembly by just putting in seat time… and not engaging, not edifying, not doing much of anything, other than warming a pew for an hour once a week. In a large congregation it can be pretty easy to just slip in and out un-noticed. Such is not all bad, as most assuredly God’s word doesn’t return void, and a whole lot of osmosis goes on just by being present. On the other hand, seat time only likely has led to a lot of Sunday morning only Christianity too. Edification takes at minimum 2 parties willing to engage… passivity on one of them doesn’t work out too well.

Perpetual Church Shopping

Perpetual church shopping is another possible approach… Wing in, get challenged, and leave as it seems too much, or one may walk in to find it cold, either emotionally, or thermally, or one gets “no feeling” from a church, or a multitude of other reasons. The end result… a near continuous series of church experiences, a lack of pastoral connectedness, and a lack of mutual edification.

Abandonment

Abandonment is of course another option, and for some it may be the only option. Case in point a church going off in lala land, and logistically there being no other options. I think its also understandable in the case of trauma such may be the only possibility, at least for a limited period of time. As healing progresses, a passive approach such as radio, tv, or internet church may provide some level of connectedness to the body of believers.

Blow off Personal Responsibility

Failure to take responsibility is perhaps one of the most pervasive responses, hey, its not my problem. Responses of “Its those peoples fault”, or its the pastors fault can give a false sense of security, but such has a way of circling back on oneself.

The proverbial… “Well, Jesus didnt really mean that” or “Hey, lets not take this so far” when responding to Jesus hard core sayings are not helpful. The “hey, pastor is the spiritual guy… let him/her take care of it alone, its not our problem” is not helpful. The corruption of the church via hate, bigotry, greed, envy, etc while individuals sit back and do nothing is not cool either. “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing” seems all too true” while written from a secular standpoint does ring all too true within the church.

Engage and take responsibility, a better solution

A better solution, albeit it may not always be possible, is to admit the problems exist, and to be there, not to cast judgment, but to share in the suffering, and mourn with one another. To be there, and to shine ones light brightly, as light very much illuminates the darkness. To be there, to preach the Gospel at all times, and if need be to use words. To be there to engage, and edify one another. To be there, when pastor needs encouragement, to be there to help one another.

Some have suggested unity is possible by viewing different churches as different parts of the body, which sort of makes sense to a point. On the other hand, we dont have feet telling hands they are of no use, nor are no good, nor do we sweep the hand under the carpet, so it sort of looks like a foot might be under there. Nor, do we run around with 50 some odd hands, and 300 feet… Maybe I’m being a bit too literal on the different parts of the body model, but the allure of sweeping parts under the carpet, or likewise bashing different parts is yet another form of doing it my way, rather than Jesus way.

By the same token, there are others who try and tweak things… and go, well maybe we can be united in our zeal for Christ, but not necessarily our beliefs. The thing is, likely such a stance is pretty much obtainable, but the question then becomes, is it really a legitimate stance to take?

The concept of being united with one another, just as Jesus and the Father is, puts the bar incredibly high. Next add in the fact that there are practices within different churches that one or more of the other churches in the body of Christ will find to be anathema.

Can they be united in their zeal for Christ? Absolutely. Can they be united in loving God, and loving their neighbor? Sort of, most certainly they can be united in loving God, and in service to ones neighbors… but can they really have a 3am in the morning theological phone call and still love the dude on the other end of the phone if their beliefs are so different? Or on the flip side, perhaps they can just agree with the dude on the other end of the phone at 3am to end it quickly so as to ignore the differences completely? Ultimately such a stance seems similar to the above groups, I’m doing it my way, rather than Jesus way.

Ultimately I think just as Bob Yerhot stated, the leg work of unity occurs on the local level. There has to be a level of love and respect despite the differences, and that is more likely to occur in the pew (even a virtual one), in a real neighbor to neighbor relationship, than say in an ivory tower, or in theological chairs.

*Ascension Sunday John 17:20-26 (Year C)

The root cause in most cases is a failure to be missional. Ie. the congregation is likely looking at the building and grounds, and ministry to themselves, rather than to the community, as far as providing for the church to continue. Rather than removing the pastor, should it not make more sense to see off the church assets, keep the pastor, and focus on community and outreach? A building a church does not make.

Of course, the problem is, folks become attached to the building, and its history. Even more so, how many would be outraged, if the church that bought the building held vastly different doctrinal beliefs? Yet, where does Jesus stand in all this? Where do we pick up our cross in this?

Along the same thought process, one might be concerned about a pastor put in that situation… no doubt there will be many nights of second guessing. What could he have done differently? Were there other solutions? Why was the congregation so inreach focused? What about the huge personal investment with the congregation? Did he have no impact? The thing is, congregations can be pretty fickle, and weird… The big thing is, where God’s word is preached, it does not return void. He may never see the results, but for sure, he made an impact. Scriptural words yes, but it doesn’t help with the heartache and second guessing of now.

I read over at Heart of a Pastor last week where he talks about the shifts involved in becoming a Missional Congregation based on a book he is reading. It seems many of the issues in churches removing the pastor are very much in the maintenance domain.

FROM:                               TO:
Maintenance                  Mission
Membership                   Discipleship
Pastor-centered           Lay-empowered
Chaplaincy (Self)         Hospitality (Others)
Focus on ourselves     Focus on the world
Settled                              Sent

My guess is, such issues develop subtlely. Perhaps when a pastor is in one place for too long a period of time? Its the old Adam’s desire to shift more and more of the burden onto the pastor, especially over time. Its the old Adam that wants his own served first. Its the old Adam that wants comfort, familiarity, and safety.A devoted pastor will do just about anything for his congregation within the bounds of scripture. He is doing his best, but he may be doing them harm, albeit totally unaware. Left unchecked for too long, years of inreach eventually will take a toll, such that all resources end up going to maintenance and sustaining efforts, rather than mission…. And then a new pastor is sent in. In short order, he realizes to fix such is going to be an intense uphill battle, and its one he may not be able to win. He can pour his heart into the congregation, only to find out at some point, he is no longer affordable, and is shown the door.

So the solution??? Nip it in the bud… I really liked what Heart of a Pastor had to say.

Are we a missional congregation or are we satisfied with the status quo?  Are we inward focused or outward focused?  Or consider this question:  If this congregation ceased to exist, would the community miss us?

I think if congregations periodically reviewed such questions, they are well on the way towards predicting problems, and heading them off at the pass. As far as congregations that are already embedded in inreach, such should serve as a wakeup call.

Granted, especially in todays climate, there are going to be events well outside the churches domain which can upset the apple cart. Ie, a factory town, should it experience massive upheaval is going to be in trouble. They may well find they end up having to move from missional to maintenance  in no time at all, especially if the town becomes 70% ghost town in a short period of time. The key I think is to keep thinking missional, and be willing to make the hard decisions early, and go forward, rather than waiting until the decision becomes a forced one later on. The other key, is always be running scenarios… how can we remain missional, if something majorly bad happens, even during the times of great church growth.

The allure of the coffee house.

What the coffee house provides beyond coffee and free wifi is the following:

• A calm, and reflective environment, ideal for creative work.

• A sense of social connectivity, in an ultra non-threatening environment. No interaction is assumed, but casual interaction may occur. This human desire for connectedness, but not interaction per se is fascinating.

• Overtime, relationships may or may not build. Being that’s not really a primary goal, coffeehouses foster a very organic relationship building process. Its vastly different than the traditional restaurant that has a coffee clique crowd so to speak. I don’t know whether this is intentional by design, but it might be. Ie, the tables for 2-4, the sofas, comfy chairs, free wifi, etc, encourage folks to linger and as such purchase more $5 coffees. A restaurant on the other hand, wants to get people in and out, and at $0.50 for coffee it makes sense. (not a coffee drinker so unsure on prices, but do cherish the coffee house environment for work and meetings)

• There is much collective wisdom. If one is bold enough to ask, many will step in to help, but its often facilitated more so by location tools like brightkite/twitter than 3d. Ie, I will jump in to help anyone on twitter, offer opinions, comments, etc. I might do so in 3d, but if not directly asked, I wont.

The church is sort of there, but not quite:

• The church has collective wisdom, but few will ask.

• The church has the capability of organic relationship building, but often its forced, or worse clique driven.

• The church has a problem with the threatening aspect. Ie how many of us would pull up to an unknown church and go and crash them? (when I traveled a lot, I did this, and its cool, but its a seemingly bold thing to do, and failure is common, ie doors locked, no one around). Imagine what would happen, if churches opened their doors, physically, as well as spiritually?

• The church often forces interaction, rather than a passive; ok if you do, fine if you dont, approach at the coffee house.

• Many sanctuaries are ideal for contemplation. Back in my CCM days, egads, the amount of writing, contemplation, and I must admit naps also  occurred in the upper balcony in churches all across the US. The thing is… it would sort of be odd, to grab a laptop and hang out in the upper balcony, even if it had free wifi, also the nature of a sanctuary doesnt align itself with collaboration either.  As a traveling musician, despite a janitor, or pastor being surprised to see one or more of us sleeping in a balcony pew, knowing our travel schedule, it was seemed to be acceptable to them, albeit likely a bit weird.

• Fellowship halls, are often seriously lacking in environment, ie they foster eating together, not so much socializing. In many cases they are pretty sterile, and the existence of sofas, reading chairs, or tables for 2 or 3 is exceedingly rare.

Tradition creates a feeling of comfort, which in and of itself is fine, but it can also lead to complacency. If one attends church A, because the primary reason is tradition, ie what one’s family has always done for generations, that can lead  to trouble. I look back to my time in Belfast many years ago. Too many times folks said they were protestant or Catholic, because their grandparents were, the theological differences between faiths played a much smaller role than tradition and politics, some did not believe at all, but still used the faith labels. It was a sad deal for sure.

Granted, if one can present Christian witness as to why one attends a church, and include family tradition, its super great. However, one should also be aware of the dangers for those who cannot present a witness of their faith. In many ways, I think upending the generational construct for the most part is a positive thing, as it may lead to further questioning and a deepening of ones faith. If the family church is on the mark, folks will return after a period of time.

As far as the lack of diversity due to church shopping being negative, I wholeheartedly agree. Often times the resulting lack of diversity from transient birds of a feather flocking together makes outreach to the community difficult as cliques began to form. Also too much homogeneity can lead to problems in discipleship. There is less challenge and less conviction outside the scope of a very narrow socio-demographic arena. Otoh, one could also attribute the potential for this to occur in a generationally focused church, unless it has a real heart for outreach and evangelism.

Years back, I remember our adult Sunday school class, a elementary teacher, a truck driver, a janitor, a college professor, and an engineer. It was cool to have such diversity and to learn from one another. And yet, when folks church shop, they often times do not seek out diversity, instead they wish to find like minded people.

• Jesus sent out the disciples with nothing, yet today, how many feel they need to have a car and a well paying tentmaker job to pastor? Certainly, both make things easier by far… ie midnight hospital calls dont lend themselves to public transit, or even bugging a church member, but workarounds can be procured. Giving to the poor, when one is poorer than those requesting help is problematic, but a group of faith can provide a resource pool, other than the pastors pocket.
• Jesus said to let the dead bury their own, ie when he called, we are to jump, not spend years getting our personal life in order. Otoh, the call is scary enough on its own, much more so, if ones personal ducks are not in order. Granted the admonitions from Timothy should be looked at, as far as the characteristics of a leader go… but also keep in mind, the disciples did not exactly lead noble lives before they met Jesus. Thus it would be exceedingly reasonable to assume that much past baggage ended up coming along for the ride. Prior reputations, just as Paul’s prior life as Saul no doubt did raise concern amongst those he ministered too, yet God called them. There is an element of power through frality that seems to ripple through scripture.
• Familiarity may also be a barrier. Paul talks about being all things to all people… that will push anyone outside of their comfort zone and then some. Its easy to want the familiarity of a previous call, or at least some semblence of commonality, from a human point of view… but that makes the call safe, perhaps too safe, and thus Paul talking about being all things to all in service to the kingdom. Familiarity can range from location, to worship style, to demographics, and even to theology in some cases. In the ELCA we have everything from high church liturgical conservatism, or the rather far out there and liberal herchurch.org. In non-denoms, the spread is likely as wide, if not wider.
• There is also an issue of confidence, and perhaps this is the biggest deal. Once one falls off the horse, if one is slow to get back on , confidence can take a real header. I just about bought the farm some 20+ years ago in an airplane… but my boss had me back up in the air in under 24 hours. It took a year plus to get over the nightmare aspects, but I had zero trepidation about entering the cockpit, even from day one. I think if one leaves a call for any number of reasons, without a game plan in place to pick up the mantle again, confidence can take a real header… and then things can spiral down pretty fast, and the lack of confidence likely results in even more barriers being put up.

The issue then becomes how to get off center, and get rolling again. And perhaps the biggest part of that is making the first step. Fear do to any or all of the above barriers can serve to paralyze. Selective procrastination due to a lack of confidence/fear can do the same. Just as analysis paralysis can come back to bite. I think the key may be to set a goal of returning to service, with many tiny steps especially at the beginning. Something as simple and unthreatening to list all the potential churches in the area is reasonably easy to go. The next step being getting on the horn, and bugging a sr pastor a day for a bit. From there church visits, and then perhaps some level of involvement in a church or two. At that point, hopefully the barriers are significantly reduced, such that one can hear the still small voice of the Holy Spirit, and the goal goes from a man driven one to a spirit led version. The big picture seems like a lot… 20 minutes on google isnt. Think small, and let God lead to the big things.