My last suggestions weren’t radical enough. The only pushback was Dave’s comment, “I guess the only one in your list I immediately balked at was the customization idea and the outsourcing idea, I could be reading it wrong, but it seems to demean the Church experience rather than enhance it.”
Economics teaches us that everyone benefits when people specialize. If I focus on sermons and the Beatles focus on songwriting, at the end of the year we write a large number of sermons and songs, some of which are good. If the Beatles and I don’t specialize, but try to do a little of both, we wind up with less total sermons and songs, and fewer of high quality. (On a side note, it’s oddly fun to write “the Beatles and I”.)
I’m not trying to demean the church. We already outsource. We let the preacher handle the sermons, the secretary handle the bulletin, the custodian handle the building. Sometimes we let talented volunteers step up: painters, carpenters, etc. But what if we didn’t limit ourselves to just church members, or local businesses?
What if you outsourced the sermon via the net? I know a lot of churches that can’t afford a full time minister. What would that even look like? I can’t imagine an aging country church gathering in the old building, watching a TV screen. Is there a situation where it would work? A strictly on-line church, maybe?
What if you outsourced the youth ministry? The majority of churches can’t pay a youth minister. Some churches already collaborate on youth events, but it would take an amazing amount of trust to send our kids to some other church for teaching. What if they never came back? What if they didn’t turn out like us? Is fear the only thing holding us back? Are we building God’s kingdom, or just protecting our institution?
What if you outsourced the book-keeping? I know way too many churches have no clue who their members are because their records are not up to date. A secondary advantage of outsourcing is that the specialists enforce appropriate standards. If we outsourced our financials, I bet those companies would require us to adopt some best practices to prevent fraud if for no other reason than to protect themselves from liability.
Are there some things that could never be outsourced? The sermon seems like a tough one in most contexts. The sacraments too, since by definition they’re live, in-person, experiences. No reason we all have to be in one room for board meetings. No reason we have to rely only on church members to do the administrative grunt work work of the church, especially if others can do it better. No reason that we all have to be in the same room to learn, or make friends. But the real work of the church (visiting the sick and the prisoner, serving the poor and the outcast , communal worship) cannot be digitized because we are not spiritual souls knocking around in a physical shell. I love my digital communities, but sometimes I need a hug.
I have two opposing responses to this post: 1. if you outsource everything then you limit the amount of interaction and integration of the various members and gifts within your congregation — is the church about giving the best product possible (which outsourcing may effectively create) or about creating a community in which God’s love can be lived out and people have the opportunity to give in all sorts of capacities even as administrators and carpenters? but on the other hand 2. perhaps a certain amount of outsourcing especially of jobs that have become too much for volunteers or one person staff members would actually free the church to focus more on God’s call to serve “the least, the last and the lost.” maybe if people weren’t let “off the hook” by serving as the church secretary, they would be more inclined to work in outreach missions or participate in worship — in some respects the harder ways to give to God, or maybe they would even have the time and inclination to serve God outside of the church
9now that’s a novel idea!) just some of my thoughts . . . after serving in two small churches and trying to think of what this would mean . . .
I agree with Corrie. Outsourcing on that scale would limit the integration of certain members. “Economics teaches us that everyone benefits when people specialize.” I think you mean more or perhaps most people benefit when they specialize (but certainly not everyone). I can think of at least one group who would not benefit from excessive outsourcing by specialists: those replaced by specialists. And let’s not forget all the underachievers (of which group I am a proud member), who are incompetent to fulfill even the simplest of Church duties, but who still want to try and fulfill them anyway. They will be passed over by those more qualified. But an in-source model would allow the incompetent to become competent through practice (albeit at everyone else’s expense). This may not be economic. It may be downright irresponsible. But it may be the formula for Christian growth.
But apart from whether or not the Church is about “giving the best product,” it seems unlikely the specialized parts could even produce a better Church. The assumption is that all these parts will function seamlessly together. But if you’ve ever put two experts in the same room (e.g., pastors), you know that agreement does not characterize the discussion by any stretch of the imagination. In that case, the mere layman shows her wisdom by her lack of expertise.
Your comment, “I bet those companies would require us to adopt some best practices to prevent fraud if for no other reason than to protect themselves from liability” brings up another danger (an ugly obscurantist’s word). There are two extremes that Christians and non-Christians want to avoid in our country. One is Church control over the state. The other is state control over the Church. Too much outsourcing could lead to state control over the Church. How many of these specialists would “require us to adopt some best practices” to protect themselves from liability, I wonder.
The nerve of you progressives shooting first and asking questions later ;-)