A Critical Examination of Business Practices in the American Church
The summer after my sophomore year of college, I did an internship with my church in Wisconsin. Beside the worship ministry, the media being produced was rudimentary at best, a complete waste at worst. I was asked to create a media strategy as my internship project, and I had weekly check-ins with my supervisor that generally went something like this: “What can we do to get the maximum number of people in our seats on Sunday? Can you believe that we had 500 people at our service? I am going to tell them to put that in the local newspaper. Imagine how that will look! We should tell our pastor to talk about ___. That will bring more people in.” And on and on and on. At the end of the internship, I learned there was very little room for me to suggest anything about our community or suggest that we make any real changes. In my head, it made a lot of sense to try and promote the beauty of our face-to-face community through our media and I knew that if I listened to what I was hearing from our congregation, we would better be able to minister to them, therefore leading people to want to gather together. I was told that if we post more of anything, even if it was not appreciated by our congregation, that we would get more attention, resulting in more followers and better community.
What Was I Experiencing?
I do not mean to be totally condescending about my church because there are a lot of things that they do well. However, at the end of the summer, I found myself completely discouraged and burnt out. I have a feeling I am not alone in my experience. In fact, I know that I am not. I did some research and talked to those wiser than me and figured out that what I was having a negative reaction to was an accepting and even prioritization of modern business practices within my church. Perhaps you have experienced something similar, especially if you have attended a “business” or mega church. Perhaps even more so if you were deeply entrenched in the running of a ministry like I was.
This is not some kind of well-kept secret that I have suddenly stumbled upon. Most churches have begun to use social media to market or advertise and I do not feel the need to spend time or space convincing anyone of that fact. However, it goes much deeper than that. When business practices are prioritized, the mindset becomes transactional, and our churches become buildings full of people committed to a highly programmed institution and committed to a brand, rather than places where those who enter recognize that they are joining into a localized faction of a worldwide community that is modeled after biblical principles. Having attended this type of church, I can say that it is very difficult to experience God's true vision for community.
Perhaps the most tell-tale sign of this mindset is the idea that large amounts of quantitative feedback (number of seats filled, number of followers, number of shares, number of books sold, number of opened emails, et cetera) is the best sign of a healthy church community.
What is the Result?
The success of a business is often measured based on its numerical growth. We know that a business is successful when they sell a large amount of what they are offering. When someone garners a lot of clients, they are generally considered to be good at their job. Additionally, within the last decade, businesses have used social media platforms, primarily Facebook and Instagram, to further their reach. Although companies will often refer to those that they reach (those who have bought their products or bought into their ideas) as their “community,” the idea of community is far different than the biblical one. The consumer/business relationship is one in which the business seeks to know the consumer only for the purpose of understanding what will drive them to consume further. The business generally has no concern for the humanity, happiness, well-being, spiritual or personal relationships of their consumer. Here is the problem: when churches adopt business practices, they begin to buy into business ideas. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that business practices in their proper place are wrong. In our society, it is important that businesses measure how successful they are and understand what their consumer wants from them. Nor am I here to criticize churches being good stewards of what they have been given. Churches should be careful to track and handle their finances carefully, meet with those they employ, and communicate effectively. The church has business to do, but they are not a business. The difference, as I can see it, comes down to the idea of community. A wholehearted embrace of business practices leads to choices made without theological considerations. This inevitably leads to the idea that excellence in technique or a magnetic personality are a necessity, as are high levels of numerical success. The ultimate result is hurting churches and fractured communities because we are not supposed to behave this way within the body of believers. Not to say that we wouldn’t have fractured communities if we didn’t embrace business practices because we are fallen human beings. However, they certainly contribute.
In order to illustrate how this process works, it may be helpful to look at a few different case studies. In each of these cases, churches or pastors embraced ideas without theologically considering what the results would be. This led to a redefinition of leadership, the idea that someone who is good at their job is someone who brings in a large number of people, the idea that leadership is synonymous with business executive leadership, and the idea that there should be a reward for good work done. All of these are relatively common business ideas and in almost all of these examples, church communities were left hurting and wounded.
The Redefinition of Leadership
Willow Creek Community Church was, at one point, the example for innovative church technology, leadership, and production. In 1995, Bill Hybels, began the Global Leadership Summit as a time for leaders to come together and better understand how to lead well. Over the last thirteen years, the make-up of the summit has changed drastically. Thirteen years ago, the faculty consisted of a small group of pastors and high-level corporate executives. As the years progressed, they added more and more faculty members including more corporate executives, politicians, celebrities, and pastors from other theological belief systems. In 2007, the ratio of pastors to other faculty members was 3:4. In 2010 it is a similar number of 2:3, but in 2014 the numbers start to change. In 2014, 2016, 2017, 2019, and 2020 respectively, the ratio is 3:8, 3:10, 2:7, 2:12, and 4:12. Additionally, most of the non-pastor faculty members in 2007 hold deeply religious or Christian beliefs. From 2010 to 2019, only one of the held any semblance of religious values or beliefs. Prior to 2018, the faculty had been pastors, CEOs of large companies, authors, and professors. In 2018 they began to include people like Bear Grylls. There is no doubt that the world needs good leaders, humans need to share our knowledge and experiences with others, and it is a wonderful reality that Christians and non-Christians can come together over wanting to lead well. However, the church needs good leaders just as much, if not more, than the rest of the world. Although the CEO of Nike and a pastor may be able to learn things from each other, church leadership must advance the gospel. A church can listen to what business leaders have to say but applying all of it would mean that the church has begun to behave like a business, leading to a redefinition of leadership.
The Redefinition of a "Good Pastor"
Hearing the names Bill Hybels, James MacDonald, and Ravi Zacharias ten years ago would come with the connotation that these men were good pastors. Years ago, if someone lived in a small town that had one church, they probably considered their pastor be a good one. Most likely, he was able to adequately care for those that were entrusted to him. He sat with the weeping and prayed with them and he knew names and family connections. It did not matter how many people showed up on Sunday morning, if he loved his community, he was a good pastor and his community valued him. I am not saying that this is not true anymore. In fact, my pastor is the definition of a shepherd and I have been willing to sit through years of mediocre sermons because I know he truly loves well. But somewhere along the way, the definition broadened. A good pastor was not only someone who could fill the seats on Sunday, but that alone made him a good pastor. This does qualify him as a good communicator, but the problem comes when he is unable to also care for those entrusted to him and the primary goal of the church becomes to fill the seats. Bill Hybels was the founding and senior pastor of Willow Creek Community Church until his resignation in 2018 due to allegations of inappropriate behavior. Hybels’s behavior included patterns of sexual harassment and misconduct, suggestive remarks, invitations to his hotel room, and prolonged hugs. Was Hybels a good communicator? Yes. Could he fill seats on Sunday? Absolutely. Was he a good pastor? I would argue that he was not. Another interesting example is that of James MacDonald. The elders of Harvest Bible Chapel concluded that the former pastor has been biblically disqualified from doing any kind of ministry or returning to leadership within their congregation. The church conducted an investigation which found MacDonald “had a pattern of being disruptive, insulting, belittling, and verbally bullying others, improperly exercising positional authority, and extravagant spending utilizing church resources resulting in personal benefit.” MacDonald’s magnetic personality attracted people to Harvest Bible Chapel. In the end, his technique nor his personality could not have mattered less. MacDonald has caused an exponential amount of hurt and damage to those at Harvest Bible Chapel, making it impossible for him to return to ministry. In October of this year, graphic accusations of sexual misconduct began to surface against world renowned speaker and author Ravi Zacharias. Zacharias had a pattern of sexual abuse over years of ministry and his excuse for the mistreatment of women was that he was doing good work for the Kingdom, why should he not receive a reward? The behavior was not “sinful,” it was God giving him a sort of bonus for all of his extra work. Ravi Zacharias could fill seats. He could sell books. People all over the world tuned in to the radio to listen to him defend the faith. But was he a good pastor? Could he genuinely treat people with dignity?
Organizational Models
An examination of other "successful" churches reveals a disturbing fact about how they are structured. A quick glance at the Hillsong website will show that although they refer to their leadership as their “eldership,” the titles given to their elders include General Manager and Director, Executive Director, and Chief Operating Officer. Similar things can be said about Willow Creek Community Church: Executive Director, Core Director, Executive Pastor, et cetera. Obviously, these are common terms used to delineate roles and responsibilities in the corporate world. When one leaves, another must be found to fill that exact role. Although neither of these churches are replacing the elder model as appointed in Scripture, they have stolen executive titles from business models and embedded them within the elder model. In some cases, “elders” are picked first and foremost because of business qualifications rather than Scriptural qualifications, which is contrary to the instructions given in 1 Timothy and Titus.
Social Media as a Business Practice
Examining these case studies, it is not hard to see how other practices such as social media use could have snuck in on the back of the practices that were already being utilized. In other words, the adoption of a Facebook or Instagram page for a church was perhaps not the first way that churches operated similarly to businesses, but it may be the most common and most impactful on our communities. Because churches were already embracing a redefinition of leadership and prioritizing numerical feedback, social media profiles were the logical next step, and in theory, an easy way to spread their message. It seemed to be working for others, why not churches as well? In my experience, a church's online presence is the thing that is often left unchecked and unconsidered from a theological standpoint. When this happens, these platforms simply perpetuate the consequences, primarily because most businesses would, in part, define “success” as having a large social media following. I remember being 13 years old and downloading Instagram for the first time. Whenever you posted something, the names of whoever liked it would show up under the post. When you got 11 likes, it would say “11 likes” underneath the post instead of usernames. Everyone would get excited when their post reached 11 likes. It looked good to others and it made you feel good. This thinking is simply engrained into our brains because it is engrained into our culture. These social media platforms espouse the idea that true community can take place on them and in them, and the church has seemingly given into and in some cases, completely adopted this idea. Facebook and Instagram are not windows into our lives and into our churches, they have become our lives and churches themselves.
The book from Social Media to Social Ministry is a dangerous example of this. Nona Jones’s idea in this book is to create a model that can be used in any church to launch a campus on Facebook complete with a campus pastor and support team. Jones’s goal is to shift the paradigm about what church is. Jones argues that church does not actually happen in a building, it happens in community. I would agree that is true. However, her definition of community is a Facebook page. The danger of this book is that Jones does a very good job of painting a picture of a failing church being suddenly and totally revived by simply making a Facebook page and hiring someone to manage it, essentially becoming campus #2 for the church. Pastors with dying churches who have not been theologically trained in thinking about how their choice of media communicates what they believe will not understand why this is so dangerous and simply accept and implement what Jones has to say. In an article from Observer they detail the mission statement changes that Facebook has made over the years. When Facebook was originally created, it was referred to as an online directory for small college communities, eventually evolving in 2009 to “Facebook gives people the power to share and make the world more open and connected." Before 2009, their previous statements included the key word “tool.” If Facebook is no longer just a tool for connecting with your already existing community and it is community itself, then why would it not make sense to do something like relocating your entire church to Facebook?
What Does this Mean for Our Churches?
To synthesize all of this information, I will say that the biblical idea of community has nothing to do with numerical data, large congregations, a popular or successful online presence, or being rewarded for any kind of work being done in this life. The biblical idea of community is entirely about in-person embodiment and belonging to a group of people, a strong-form familial assembly. It is a gracious gift given to believers in which we are to encourage, exhort, and hold one another accountable. Pastors and staff members are not exempt from this model, in fact it is incredibly important that they are just as closely knit to the rest of the body so that the congregation is free to encourage and hold them accountable as well. Because the adoption of business practices leads to an idea of community that is based on things not modeled in the Scriptures, our church communities are hurting and broken, in need of a lesson on true community. Additionally, a church does not have to have bought into every single one of these ideas in order to have an unhealthy community. A church can still be entirely too focused on numerical data because they are using social media poorly and not have a pastor who spends all his time being the face of a brand. My church is a prime example of this. The truth is that if any one of these ideas are present in a church, their community will be affected.
The Definition of True Community
To understand how our communities should look, we can look to a few scholars, classical works on community, and Paul’s theology. I would argue that if using business practices does not help us in our pursuit of this unique and momentously important gift, then we should abandon the use of them. Especially if they breed habits and hearts that are unbiblical. What is first important to understand is that Christian community is a precious gift, given by God to each believer. It is a relational entity. We may even say that our Christian community is as precious as our biological one and even more so eternal.
In Joseph Hellerman’s summary of When the Church Was a Family, he explored the view of church and community that the early church had in comparison to today’s evangelical environment that Americans exist in. He says it better than I ever could:
“For the early Christians, belonging to a local church was a commitment to a group of people—not a commitment to a highly programmed institution driven by Western ideologies of corporate management and success measured solely by numerical growth.”
Hellerman stresses that the decision to be in this gift of community is a decision that must be made by each individual and it must be made daily. It cannot be something that is forced or finagled, or it will not be genuine. We must choose to remain in this community, to remain in person. Those who choose to stay are making the decision to grow and to help others grow. True community includes exhortation, encouragement, holding each other accountable. We must therefore be prepared to stay because this does not come easily. The world, and often our own emotions, will scream at us constantly to choose the easier option. That option is the opposite of this community that ultimately brings life. Finally, Hellerman says that this all depends on the leader’s ability to not only teach this model of community, but to model it themselves.
“The American evangelical model of the CEO pastor who functions as a spiritual father to his congregation and as a business executive with his staff— but who relates to no one in the church as a peer brother in Christ—will only serve to undermine any attempts to recapture Jesus’ vision for authentic Christian community.”
The leader who has no spiritual brothers cannot encourage others to have spiritual brothers. A leader who thinks this way will better know how to advance the gospel. A leader who thinks this way will learn to not care how many followers they have. A leader who thinks this way will learn to not care whether 10 people or 20 thousand people listen to him preach every Sunday. All this leader will learn to care about is how well his community – his spiritual siblings – are modeling the love of Christ and His vision for the church. By focusing on the community and not focusing on business techniques, he is freeing himself from becoming a pastor caught up in the excellence of technique or the magnetic personality. He is allowing others to hold him accountable. Secondly, true Christian community is in-person embodiment.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Life Together is one of the classic Christian books on this gift of community. A prized testimony of faith and courage, it famously reads like one of Paul’s letters and gives practical advice on how Christians can be sustained by those around them. It is worth mentioning that Bonhoeffer published this book at the height of the Nazi regime, when freedom was virtually nonexistent. The gift of true Christian community would have been hard to come by. Bonhoeffer says,
“the physical presence of the believer is a source of incomparable joy and strength to the believer.”
This is widely demonstrated in Scripture by both Paul and John. In 2 Timothy, Paul calls Timothy to his side in prison so that he may simply be with him as a source of comfort. As Paul was suffering, all he wanted was to be physically present with another believer. He did not want a letter from Timothy, he wanted Timothy himself. In 2 John, John makes it very clear that his joy will not be complete until he can speak face-to-face instead of writing with ink. Bonhoeffer warns the Christian not to take advantage of this gift of true community, and to realize that it is simply by grace that we are allowed to live amongst each other, and it is a gift that could be taken away at any time. The goal of all Christian community is to meet each other in-person as bringers of the message of salvation. When we embrace practices in which the primary goal is not to bring the gospel, we are not cultivating nor embracing true Christian community. Bonhoeffer ends by saying,
“There is probably no Christian to whom God has not given the uplifting experience of genuine Christian community at least once in his life. But in this world such experiences can be no more than a gracious extra beyond the daily bread of Christian community life. We have no claim upon such experiences, and we do not live with other Christians for the sake of acquiring them.”
I have a feeling Bonhoeffer would agree with me: true and real Christian community is not something that can be forced, it is not something that can be bought, it is not something that can be finagled by using the exact mix of methods suggested by business professionals. It is a precious gift that we should be consistently pointing back to. We are also reminded that sin draws a person away from Christian community and the more isolated a person is, the more opportunity they are giving sin to have a hold in their life. All the more reason why it is important to come together, encourage each other, and keep each other accountable.
Paul's Writings
Perhaps the most impactful use of mediated communication that we have can be seen in Paul’s letters. When reading through the Pauline epistles, the first thing to note is that Paul is physically incapable of being with the people with whom he is communicating. He may be in another city and at times he is in prison. He feels the need to communicate something to a body of believers which they need to hear. It may be exhortation or correction, but he finds a way to communicate when he cannot be present. Although 21st century churches using social media is not the same as Paul being in prison, there are comparisons that we can draw. With the lives that 21st century Americans lead, we are pulled in many different directions all week long. Traditionally, one of the only times when an entire church body can be together in person is on Sunday morning. So, does that mean that we should only communicate on Sunday? I would argue that is not the case, and Paul’s method for communicating when he is not present can be a model for our communication during the week. Obviously, there is no need to make the case that mediated communication is wrong or that the Bible would tell us not to use it. The Bible itself is mediated communication and Paul used it extensively. However, the key here is that in his disembodiment he was not attempting to appear wholly in the medium. He acknowledged that he was not with the community he addressed, but there was always a point of planned human contact to come. In Romans 1:11, Paul says, “For I long to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you – that is, that we may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith, both yours and mine.” Philippians 1:8: “For God as my witness, how I yearn for you all with the affection of Christ Jesus.” 2 Timothy 1:4: “As I remember your tears, I long to see you, that I may be filled with joy.” Not only does Paul long to be with them, showing that he values being together, but he recognizes that mutual encouragement to the full extent and a true filling of joy come from being in community with other believers. He also writes in all seasons, when churches are doing well, and when it is necessary for him to remember their tears. Paul had one specific habit that can show us that he truly valued in-person community and face-to-face conversation. Although Paul uses mediated communication because he could not be present, he continuously sent a representative to read and explain his letters to the recipients. We can see this in Romans 16:1-2 with Phoebe, and in Ephesians 2:25-30 with Epaphroditus.
It is obvious that the church does not function at its best when its mindset veers dangerously close to objectification. Business practices, when used as the primary mindset, do not create the kind of community that our theology dictates we should have. Because at its core, business will always be transactional, this is the obvious result. The most alien perspective to scripture is to think of humans in transactional terms. Even Willow Creek has been candid about the results of their methods that did not sit well in their theological conscience. I am not arguing that the church cannot function with this attitude, but it is obvious that it does not function at its best. Should we not strive for the best? For God’s vision for us? There is not simply new evidence for this fact, see the Bayeux Tapestry or look at some of motivation behind the Crusades to see that these are not new ideas.
Now What?
Knowing that using social media without theological consideration perpetuates the consequences of the adoption of business practices, our first option would be to abandon all business practices and all mediated communication and simply exist as an in-person community and an in-person community only. If a church wants to do that, I would absolutely cheer them on. However, churches have already done such a good job of engraining mediated communication into their daily running, does it make sense to scrap all of it? I would argue that it isn’t necessary to do that. Paul himself did not avoid using mediated communication. The Bible itself is mediated communication. However, Paul never tried to appear fully in the medium. His letters were always second best to being in person with whom he was talking. I believe that we can still use the tools available to us while rejecting a prioritization of business practices so that we can truly engage in true community and view it as the gift that it truly is. We should view leadership in the way that we are taught in the Scriptures. We should hold leaders accountable to the same standard on stage and in their personal lives. We should act as a family that is knit closer than blood. Leadership should also participate in this mentality, as it protects from a prioritization of technique and the need for magnetic personality. We should not try and create a true sense of community online, but rather use our online presence to create a window into our community. I would argue that “Facebook church” is not a valid idea. Watching a church service is not the same as going to church. Rather, think of a Facebook page as a skylight for those outside to view down into what is happening at church and for those who are a part of the community to be reminded of the beauty that happens when they are together and make them want to come back.
Let us remember that I am not saying that business practices, when used in the correct context, are all bad. But they will breed something bad when they are the primary focus in our churches. Additionally, this is not to say that mediated communication cannot be used for offshoots of this community. We can continue the conversations we have in our communities over text or a YouTube video, but it all starts in community. We cannot have substantial conversations about our community or with our community if we do not have the community in the first place. In the wake of COVID-19, I would also say that it is not a bad idea to make things available for those who cannot access them in person for the sake of the overall wellness of the community, but let us not mistake our online representation as our true community. As churches, we are supposed to reflect the love of Christ. Jesus didn't die for you because it was a good deal. He served because he loved. He valued real people, real community, real communion. He was not concerned with being well-known or having enough followers. He didn't think that defined his ministry and neither did Paul. Our churches should do the same. I am calling for a better starting point. A starting point in which all of our communication holds our community in mind. A starting point in which every action that we take is examined through the lens of our theology. What does our theology say about this action and what are we communicating by doing it?
I started this paper by detailing an experience about my own church. Because of the extensive research I have done, I have come to some difficult conclusions about both my ecclesiology and how my own church has affected the idea of community in which I grew up. During my internship, I realized that the people responsible for communicating the love of Christ and the value of our church community to those outside of it were miserably failing, and still, I love my church deeply. I have written a letter detailing how the choices they made affected my life and encouraging them to reject some of the ideas they have adopted. I also urge them to redefine and rearticulate their theology of community. If a practical exemplification for a specific church body will help to synthesize this information, you are welcome to read it here.
Works Cited
Armamentos, Rachel. What the Apostle Paul's Letters Can Teach Us About Socially Distanced Church. 30 Aug. 2020, relevantmagazine.com/faith/church/what-the-apostle-pauls-letters-can-teach-us-about-socially-distanced-church/.
Bayeux Tapestry - Visit of the Bayeux Tapestry. www.bayeuxmuseum.com/en/the-bayeux-tapestry/.
Belz, Emily. New Sexual Misconduct Claims Surface about Ravi Zacharias - WORLD. world.wng.org/2020/10/new_sexual_misconduct_claims_surface_about_ravi_zacharias.
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, and Samuel Wells. Life Together. SCM Press, 2015.
Campbell, Nathan. Cicero and the Apostle Paul as Social Media Pioneers. st-eutychus.com/2013/cicero-and-the-apostle-paul-as-social-media-pioneers/.
“Crusades.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 22 Oct. 2020, www.britannica.com/event/Crusades.
Global Leadership Network. globalleadership.org/.
Global Leadership Network. www.youtube.com/user/wcavideo.
Hellerman, Joseph H. When the Church Was a Family: Recapturing Jesus' Vision for Authentic Christian Community. B & H Publishing Group, 2014.
The Holy Bible ESV. Crossway Bibles, 2007.
Hybels, Lynne, and Bill Hybels. Rediscovering Church: The Story and Vision of the Willow Creek Community Church. 1995, www.amazon.com/Rediscovering-Church-Vision-Willow-Community/dp/0310530601.
Jones, Nona J. From Social Media to Social Ministry: A Guide to Digital Discipleship. Zondervan Reflective, 2020.
Leadership. hillsong.com/leadership/.
Reagan, Gillian. The Evolution of Facebook's Mission Statement. 13 Mar. 2014, observer.com/2009/07/the-evolution-of-facebooks-mission-statement/.
Shellnutt, Kate. Harvest Elders Say James MacDonald Is 'Biblically Disqualified' From Ministry. 5 Nov. 2019, www.christianitytoday.com/news/2019/november/harvest-elders-say-james-macdonald-biblically-disqualified.html.
Shellnutt, Kate. Willow Creek Investigation: Allegations Against Bill Hybels Are Credible. 28 Feb. 2019, www.christianitytoday.com/news/2019/february/willow-creek-bill-hybels-investigation-iag-report.html.
When the Church Was a Family: PART ONE. 13 Feb. 2010, hellerman.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/when-the-church-was-a-family-part-one/.
Willow Creek Leadership. www.willowcreek.org/en/about/willow-creek-leadership.