Some of you are familiar with one of the mothership mega-churches, Willow Creek in Chicago. Seeker-sensitive, heavily programmed, “innovative,” determined to reach out, bring in those seekers and make disciples out of them. In the 90’s, the Willow Creek Association was formed to link up and assist other churches around the country and the world who wanted to follow the Willow Creek model.
Well, one of the hot discussion points around the evangelical blogs this week has been a talk given by Willow Creek founder and pastor Bill Hybels in which he calls into question the effectiveness of his own model. There’s a summary at this blog, associated with Christianity Today.
Not long ago Willow released its findings from a multiple year qualitative study of its ministry. Basically, they wanted to know what programs and activities of the church were actually helping people mature spiritually and which were not. The results were published in a book, Reveal: Where Are You?, co-authored by Greg Hawkins, executive pastor of Willow Creek. Hybels called the findings “earth shaking,” “ground breaking,” and “mind blowing.”
snip
Speaking at the Leadership Summit, Hybels summarized the findings this way:
Some of the stuff that we have put millions of dollars into thinking it would really help our people grow and develop spiritually, when the data actually came back it wasn’t helping people that much. Other things that we didn’t put that much money into and didn’t put much staff against is stuff our people are crying out for.
Having spent thirty years creating and promoting a multi-million dollar organization driven by programs and measuring participation, and convincing other church leaders to do the same, you can see why Hybels called this research “the wake up call” of his adult life.
Hybels confesses:
We made a mistake. What we should have done when people crossed the line of faith and become Christians, we should have started telling people and teaching people that they have to take responsibility to become ‘self feeders.’ We should have gotten people, taught people, how to read their bible between service, how to do the spiritual practices much more aggressively on their own.
In other words, spiritual growth doesn’t happen best by becoming dependent on elaborate church programs but through the age old spiritual practices of prayer, bible reading, and relationships. And, ironically, these basic disciplines do not require multi-million dollar facilities and hundreds of staff to manage.
Another blog, reflecting on this,summarized the findings this way:
Here’s the backstory: Greg Hawkins, exec pastor at Willow Creek, surveyed Willow Creek members to determine the effectiveness of WC’s programs — small groups, worship, service groups, etc. Participants had four choices to describe their spiritual lives:
- Exploring — not yet Christians, but interested.
- Growing — new Christians and growing in faith.
- Close to Christ.
- Centered in Christ.
The survey results produced what Bill Hybels calls “the wake up call of my adult life” –
Survey Says: After a person left Stages 1 & 2, church programs did not help them love God or love people more. And, to make matters worse, people in Stages 3 & 4 said they wanted to “be fed.” Some even left Willow Creek altogether.
Conclusion: Church programs are helpful initially for new and growing Christians, but as people mature in their faith church programs are inadequate and ineffective. (Watch the videos and look at Willow Creek’s new REVEAL website for their next move.)
My Take: People are looking for God. After a seeker learns the basics of the Christian faith and makes a commitment to Christ, they want to experience God, not just learn about God.
The survey indicated that people continued to grow, not through programs, but through the practice of spiritual disciplines — Bible reading, prayer, and other expressions of personal commitment.
The striking things about this two me are:
1) Thinking through Hybels’ understanding of church – it being, fundmentally a school. A place to be taught and formed. The old WC model saw it as a life-long school, but now he’s saying “Graduate!” It’s a strange kind of either/or landscape, isn’t it? If “programs” that come from the institution don’t “work,” then the only other option is for you to do it on your own.
2) The Catholic understanding of Church is, of course, so much different, and I think the WC experience and research shows, once again, why caution has to reign as we look at these “rapidly growing” entities. First, they are not as “effective” as they seem, and secondly, they are rooted (obviously) in a Protestant understanding of church, and what Hybels is discerning as a “failure” of sorts just might be related to what this understanding of church leaves out of their definition.
It should be a wake-up call to Catholics trying to figure out and do evangelization in the contemporary world to read this and contemplate what the second blogger pulls out of the study – that
After a person left Stages 1 & 2, church programs did not help them love God or love people more. And, to make matters worse, people in Stages 3 & 4 said they wanted to “be fed.” Some even left Willow Creek altogether.
Being a disciple of Jesus begins in answer to a call..but then the road continues.
Sometimes people get enthused about “Catholic identity” or “the treasures of our Catholic faith” in a way that leaves the impression it is all about a wonderful, unique club that you really should appreciate because it’s, well…Catholic. And it’s good to be Catholic. Come be Catholic with us! Join our community! Enjoy our treasures!
But that’s not the “treasure of our Catholic faith.” The treasure of our Catholic faith is Jesus Christ, and not words about Him, but Him. Present. When you take a good, broad and deep look at the whole picture, what you find is that (for lack of a better word) this “system” of being Catholic is essentially 2000 years of helping people love God and people more, and “feeding” them – in ways deeply rooted in the Gospel, growing organically from the apostolic Church and doing so in amazingly diverse ways, fitting for every time and place and types of people.
And the reason for this all goes back to ecclesiology. What is the Church? A school to teach me about Jesus and then leave me on my own with my Bible…or something else?
So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you
are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the
household of God, built upon the foundation of the apos-
tles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the corner-
stone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and
grows into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also
are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.
(Ephesians 2:19-22)
Let’s not forget the lessons of this survey about folks at Stages 1 and 2, however. You are perfectly correct that the treasure of the Catholic Church is none other than Jesus Christ, present; correct, too, to observe that the Church is far more than simply a school. But don’t forget the number of ill-formed Catholics around. The Church isn’t always successful at helping folks get *to* Stage 3.
Programs, while incomplete, sometimes have their place. Just don’t try to build an ecclesiology—still less a Church—around them.
Peace,
–Peter
This actually corresponds pretty well to my own spiritual life. Usually how well I am living the faith has far more to do with how much I put into it during the week than how “solid” my pastor or bishop is. When people talk about leaving the Catholic Church b/c they can’t find a good parish I tend to ask, What are you doing? Are you frequenting the sacraments? Doing mental prayer daily? Reading scripture and other spiritual reading regularly? This will mean much more than whether Father gives a good homily on Sunday.
I am not saying community doesn’t matter. It clearly does and having a good “support system” can be important. But I still argue that regular practices of piety are more important to persevering and growing in the faith.
I want to know how many people answer that they’re “centered in Christ”. I mean, the people who are most Christ-centered are the least likely to say that about themselves, as they see how far they have to go.
Be evangelized, and respond whole-heartedly to Christ.
Become catechized, so that you know your faith and can both speak and model it for others.
Then: Live it out–
–worship and renew, feed on Jesus weekly + more; center every day on listening to Him in Scripture and prayer, and do whatever he tells you
–if you are married, continually nourish your spouse and the relationships your union generates; do this with your community, however informal, if you are not married
–regularly cleanse yourself from sin by confession, penance and the other disciplines of a holy life, especially prayer, fasting, and almsgiving
–devote yourself to the Apostolic teaching, (and see to it your children are likewise fed)
–be a positive part of supportive fellowship for others in your parish, including those in charge of it
–find and develop your talents for sharing the Gospel and making healing available to all
This reminds me of a certain list…which was stated in a minimalist/legalistic sounding way, but … .
Give Hybels credit for integrity and having a healthy sense of critical thinking. If the USCCB ever had the guts to conduct a study like this it would have been covered up ASAP.
How often does the Catholic Church ever do an honest appraisal of our own evangelization and catechetical efforts? Ours is mired in subjective analysis– pro and con– with the conclusions generally predetermined (e.g. “we’re being renewed!”)
Sociologically the US Catholic Church has been in decline in most areas for the past 40 years, yet institutionally we are incapable of dealing with the massive failure of our time. Individual bright spots cannot make up for the fact that we are a failing church bouyed up only by large numbers of inactive and/or unevangelized Catholics. We grow in absolute numbers only through immigration.
AFAIK we are incapable institutionally of addressing this as an American Church. Which means, institutionally, it cannot be fixed. All the more important that independent Catholic endeavors (like St. Blogs) continue outside the diocesan structure.
Cheers to Mr. (Rev?) Hybel! Surely he will act upon the information available to him Would that the USCCB be capable of such introspection and action.
I think part of the problem was the USCCB did do a critical analysis of what was working and what wasn’t. They ended up concluding that traditional, contemplative mass was ineffective. It is a problem when you simply ask people about their spiritual health. Jesus talked many times about people who thought they were spiritually healthy but, in fact, were going to hell.
The other factor that can bias studies like this is the studiers have a vested interest in the outcome. If you ask preachers to study the value of preaching you get skewed results. Same thing if you are liturgists to study the value of creative liturgy.
I think it’s Bill Hybels, isn’t it, not Greg?
The problem is not that we lack programs. We have all too many programs. We need a return to the contemplative Mass, as Randy said. That Mass, with the Eucharist, and Eucharistic adoration is the real program that enables growth in the faith. It’s how we are incorporated into Christ. That’s how the “treasures” of the faith work to get us to the Treasure of the faith, Jesus Christ. The Church is not an institution, but the Body of Christ, which He fashioned Himself as our home.
I wish we could abandon all the references to “disciples” in favor of “becoming like Christ.” It’s all about the quest for holiness and the fact that true conversion takes a lifetime. That’s not something that a program can really address.
I agree with Kerry about having too many programs. Our parish is adding yet another “ministry”. There is constant patting our backs about how good we are. There is constant applause with each pat on the back. Whatever happened to the idea that we do something as a service and not for recognition. Also, we have the constant pushing of the Christ Renews His Parish program.
I would rather have a better explanation of Church teachings and why we do things the way we do without the constant “we do it right and you don’t” attitude I see in numerous blogs and among some parishioners. The attitude is a complete turnoff for my husband and me. It has hindered my efforts to assist my husband back to a more “orthodox” path.
Thank you Fr. Michael for your response. I can’t imagine the American Bishops responding to a study that called for serious changes. Just some open, honest dialogue would be a tremendous morale booster for many priests and others. I feel so isolated from the bigger church. Is anyone listening to our folks?
Our pastor refers to it as “they are providing information, but not formation.” Stages 1 and 2 are ideally supposed to provide both–enough information to help people through the formation of their Catholicism. But formation is never completed, formation merely starts there, and then the formation of the prayerful person, the person able to find God and do His will needs more then just information. So ministries, programs, etc. don’t feed people, don’t provide ongoing formation. And when stages 1 and 2 only provide information in the first place, then they’ve birthed a new Catholic who doesn’t have many tools to feed his own formation in Christ.
A church does have a responsibility to help formation. It needs to teach us how to pray if we dont’ know how. It needs to be opening its doors so we can attend mass. It needs to make those masses truly holy. It needs to provide sacraments, and to form our understanding of those, etc.
But introspection into this would be a great start. Kudos to other Christians who try to find out if they are helping people reach Christ.
Randy, I’m not familiar with the USCCB study you are citing. Could you provide some more information?
As a “second vocation” priest, the lack of quantifiable data and even statiscally reliable measures of effectiveness of ministries (such as RCIA) has been surprising. I think the work of Andrew Greeley (granted, not my favorite priest) in regards to the role of Catholic schools: we need more of that, please.
Allison,
You’re right. It’s information, not formation. And you only get that through prayer and the Mass (and observing truly holy Catholics who do the same). And churches need to be open for those who want to meditate or those who may want to return, but just need some time to be in the presence of Our Lord as preparation.
I’d also opt for getting rid of those “pre-evangelization” notions that only seek to make Christ known, but without reference to the Church. They are useless and distort the faith.
Fr. Michael:
I agree. What is amazing is that Willowcreek asked the questions, pursued the questions, and then acknowledged their findings publicly and will almost certainly make a major effort to change to become more effective.
I have almost never encountered that sort of attitude in the Catholic ecclesial world – except among lay leaders or clerics with a business background.
Indeed, I wrote an entire blog post on exactly that: “the Question that May Not Be Asked” here:
http://blog.siena.org/2007/01/question-that-must-not-be-asked.html
Sherry,
Why is the business background even necessary? We’re not customers, we’re there to worship God. Willow Creek used a business model and it didn’t work. So why are you interested in it?
I am not citing a specific study. I was not around back then. I do think the 70’s and 80’s saw a lot of change. There was no fear of questioning the way things were always done. Sure, the process could have been better but questions were being asked. Maybe to many of the questions were asked by the elite. Maybe they need to be asked by laymen more as Sherry seems to indicate. I am not sure exactly. I just know it is not fair to say nobody gave these matters any thought and nobody changed anything.
I think they are still asking questions but the wrong questions. Spiritual formation programs like RCIA are being evaluated. But the biggest concern seems to be whether anyone is being offended or not. That is very different from asking if people are learning the faith and becoming active members of the community. I went through RCIA and I can tell you those questions are not being asked at my parish. If they were the answers would be “no” and “no.”
To truly effect structural changes at a episcopal level we have to have ministries that are so effective they cannot be looked passed. This means effective and zealous pastors with the same kind of staff. Once this happens a cultural change can happen at the parish level that can then have a bottom-up effect.
I have seen it happen at the campus ministry level. Campus ministries that are thriving are the model on which all other campus ministries now strive to emulate. It begins with authentic formation of the young people in front of us and a desire to evangelize the un-churched, fallen-away and active Catholics.
It starts and ends with the Holy Mass and a return to Confession. But, the formation, catechesis and evangelization should take on many different forms. Not necessarily in a traditional programming format, but in true and authentic love of Christ and His Church.
Sherry, I was thinking of the Sienna Institute among other things when I wrote about “independent Catholic endeavors.” Cheers to your good work!
Jerry,
The business background is *not* necessary.
I’m just noting that such a background does tend to make pastoral leaders that I’ve worked with more likely to ask obvious questions such as “are we actually doing what we are supposed to do, what Christ has commanded us to do?” It’s just an observation after having worked with hundreds of pastors and parish staff.
For some reason that is not demanded at all by Catholic theology or spirituality, many Catholic pastoral leaders tend to skip over many of those kinds of questions. Why I don’t know.
It’s actually pretty simplistic and unfair to describe Willowcreek as following a “business model”. And much of what they have done has “worked” in light of the goal they had set for themselves: many unchurched Americans (half of them lapsed Catholic, folks – this is Chicagoland!) have become “devoted followers of Jesus Christ” (as Willowcreek would put it) through that Church.
But what is fascinating is they aren’t resting on their considerable laurels. They are still asking the questions – “can we impact more people?” and they are, staggeringly, at the highest level, willing to acknowledge really significant pastoral errors.
I was a Protestant for about 5 years but am now Catholic. I relate well to the video, Reveal. The local church I attended helped me tremendously for the first few years (stages one and two) but once my faith was founded and I moved into stage 3 I realized that there needed to be something more than what my church was providing. I found that something in the Catholic Church and the Eucharist. I think the interesting thing is that the WC model gets people in the door and gives them an elementary education on God but doesn’t (and maybe cannot) provide for the more spiritually mature while the Catholic Church does just the opposite. Believers who already know Christ and want him more find Him, along with great peace in the Eucharist. I wonder, should the Catholic Church consider some type of WC model for seekers and bring them into full communion after a period of learning? Basically, the RCIA process but with a more energetic and charismatic feel about it, like a good Protestant church would do it.
There’s lies, damned lies and statistics. It depends on who’s doing the measuring, what their agenda is, what questions they ask and how they’re asked. And how can you determine spirituality by statistics anyway?
A large part of the problem is the expectation hat has been generated that “my needs will be met”. Now, that sounds fine in and of itself, but that view has become nothing different than “will this product or that product fulfill my needs”. When we place our identity in what we want (“need”), rather than in Christ, we will necessarily devolve to consumerist Christianity, whether it be Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox. This crisis is the temptation of our materialist age: We are not empted to go and make sacrifices to Jupiter – instead we are tempted to be Jupiter. Every age has its own set of temptations. So its not only “Willow Creek”, but all over Christianity. Some just marketed themselves more aggresively than others.
Amy, thanks for linking to my blog on the WC issue. Brad Wright, professor of sociology of Christianity, evaluated the WC survey process and interpretation itself and found it lacking in many areas. You can find my post about it here — http://chuckwarnockblog.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/willow-creek-study-flawed-says-prof/
It’s an interesting issue that will resonate for some time. Your insights and reader comments add value to the conversation.
- Chuck