How Great the Pain of Searing Loss...

This has been a tough week for me. Two of my favorite shows went off the air. Their series finales were shown on Sunday and Monday nights. I'm speaking of Lost and 24. No more Jack Shepherd. No more CTU. No more Smoke Monster sightings or digital tick-tock commercial breaks. No longer will I hear Sawyer's insulting quips, Chloe's ridiculously bad acting, or either shows uncanny ability to make me eager to get to the next week. They are done. And I am all alone.




Not really alone, per say. I'm actually one of millions affected by the ends of both. These are two of the longest relationships I've had with shows, both of which I began in my first year out of college. I've watched every single episode. I am fully invested in every major character, and it almost feels like losing someone who played an integral part of my life. Of course, I'm being dramatic. Life will go on, other shows will take their place, and each actor will go on to other projects. While I and many others will argue that there may never be a show like Lost or 24 again, it will be ok. We will survive.



It's incredible how hard it can be to lose something so ingrained in our everyday function. Either show was a normal topic of conversation among friends. Both contained thematic elements I'd casually reference with others whom I knew watched. One of my buddies even checked into his honeymoon suite under the name Jack Bauer. Now that these programs no longer exist, there will be an adjustment period for many. And this time I'm not being dramatic; literally, we will have to adjust to our new reality.

Change is a difficult thing. I say that as someone who welcomes new surroundings, ideas, and people. I don't typically like routine, I can't stand monotony, and I absolutely abhor life without progress. So while I enjoy change, I know it's not easy. In fact, change is one of the hardest things for churches to endure. Anytime individuals have a constant (nice Lost reference) removed from them, it regularly takes a while for life to settle down. Organizations are made up of multiple individuals, in many ways subscribing to a group-think mindset. Once again, the adjustment is more drastic because the change affects many. Because there are multiple types of changes that churches must deal with, I'm going to focus on one in this post: when one of your own moves away.

I hate losing people. It's hard when people leave over conflict or differing preferences or any other reason you could think of. But when people move away, its almost harder because they want to go to a new city or new job, but not a new church. They are sad and you are sad. And it gets worse if they are people who had many responsibilities in the church. I write this with someone in mind.



At the end of the summer in 2008, Epoch Church had to go through this very thing. We lost Justin and Robyn Bourlon, when Justin took a new position with Kraft in Rogers, Arkansas, located 3 hours away. They had both been there from the beginning. Justin had left a church he was attending to be a part of the start-up, and Robyn became a part of the church immediately after she moved to Little Rock. They become engaged and married while they were with Epoch, Justin headed up our finance committee, they were small group leaders, etc., etc. It was a hard loss. Oh, not to mention that Justin was and is one of my closest friends. Several others in the church were in the same boat as I was. It was incredibly difficult to have been such a big part of their lives, for them to be such a big part of ours, and to know that there were several roles that needed filling in a church without a lot of resources.

Soon after, a newlywed couple in our church volunteered to lead a small group. They had agreed to take the first year of their marriage to not accept other responsibilities and focus on each other. They reached their 1 year anniversary a month after the Bourlons moved away, and they recognized the need existing in their church. A few months after this, a new couple began coming to Epoch who had moved to be campus ministers at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Several months later, our small groups expanded and they became leaders. Just before this, a recent college graduate named Sam moved to Little Rock and became active with Epoch. He was in the process of passing his CPA. Therefore, he was an obvious choice to lead the finance team. He accepted and has willingly served ever since. Flash forward almost two years since Justin and Robyn left, and we still miss them. We could still use them. But their absence led to a realized need among the community. People volunteered to take their place.



Do you know why muscles get bigger when you lift weights? If muscle fibers are strained enough, they tear. Through the synthesizing of protein, these torn muscles are rebuilt with the capacity to take on the load that was previously applied to them. Through this process of the body adapting, lifters get stronger. This is an accurate picture of what can happen in a church when volunteer leaders leave. Much like a pruned bush, a broken bone, or an over-worked bicep, churches can grow stronger through these instances. If Justin and Robyn had not left, who knows if that first couple would have stepped up to become small group leaders? Maybe Sam would have never been asked to join the finance team. The Bourlon's absence, from an organizational stance, may have been a positive thing because of the urgency with which people in the church recognized a need for more leaders.

Change can be a tough pill to swallow. But in this case, we clearly see how a young church had an opportunity to be strengthened by losing some of its key leaders. I am not suggesting that you should be happy when leaders go; on the contrary, I dread the next time I see a friend move off (or I move off myself). What I firmly believe, however, is that churches must view changes within their communities as opportunities to be strengthened. And if you've noticed, I have only focused on organizational structure - I've said nothing about the work of the Holy Spirit, who is far better at preparing us to embrace and grow during changing times than we could prepare for on our own. The next time your church loses someone crucial to its mission, take your time to mourn. Take your time preparing for what must be done to fill their shoes. But be excited over who will step up and carry the load. When a church follows God's direction, there is literally no limit to who He will use and how He will use them, and what He will accomplish with what He has.

In other words, change can be an awesome thing.

Diffusion of Church Relevance

In the 1980's, America was undergoing its own AIDS crisis, especially in San Francisco. One of the projects responsible for drastically slowing down the spread of AIDS in San Fran was called Stop AIDS (not exactly catchy, but whatever). The key approach utilized by members of the Stop AIDS project was small group diffusion. Stop AIDS employed outreach workers to set up small group meetings throughout the gay community to discuss ways to prevent the spread of HIV. At the end of each small group session, the leader would ask those who would practice these measures and organize a small group meeting themselves to raise their hands.



Stop AIDS trained over 7,000 small group leaders and reached over 30,000 people through small group meetings. In 1983, there were 8,000 new cases of AIDS. By 1985, there were 650 new cases, which is still 650 important lives, but a dramatic decrease of new infections (91%).

This is a case I've read over, analyzed, and studied on numerous occasions. Stop AIDS used a communication theory called Diffusion of Innovations, which was the theory I covered in my master's thesis. There are many different areas that this theory can/has/should be applied within churches. Most churches already indirectly practice this. Small groups, community groups, cell groups, or any other name you choose to attach, is small group diffusion. But when we say the word "innovation," we're clearly referring to a new idea. Church small groups are not a new idea - but using small groups to spread the gospel may be (at least in America).

I've heard of newer church plants in progressive cities employing this type of outreach. Bread & Wine Church in Portland appears to center themselves around small group meetings. Duke Revard, one of Bread & Wine's pastors, explains their approach this way: "Gospel Communities are the central rhythm of Bread&Wine. We come together because of the Gospel. We are growing up into a deeper understanding and application of the Gospel. We are taking the Gospel to the neighborhood/city/world through intentional missional engagement. I believe this is the most effective way to reach an increasingly secular society."

Those subscribing to the Diffusion of Innovation model would agree. In less-churched areas of the country, regular involvement in a Christian community is a new idea to most. But why would breaking down the idea of a thriving, growing, multi-media driven church to that of a decentralized, small group-based, simple approach be so effective in a metropolitan, cutting-edge city like Portland? If you asked Revard, it comes largely down to cultural relevance. "People in the increasing post-Christian Pacific NW see church buildings as an injustice," says Revard. He goes on to explain that many Oregonians see large church buildings and technological approaches as money spent on self rather than meeting needs of people. "Therefore, the attractional model has seen its day, and we have to adapt."

As post-modern and anti-establishment as this approach sounds, the foundational purpose is to bring the Gospel to places and people where it is absent. If we go back to the previously mentioned diffusion of innovation theory, a specific criteria exists that new ideas must adhere to in order to be adopted. These 5 major characteristics are as follows:

1. Relative Advantage - There must more pros than cons to the new idea over the old idea it seeks to replace

2. Compatibility - It must meet the demand of the population to which its being introduced

3. Complexity - It must not be complicated to understand and apply
4. Trialability - It must be tried before one must commit to or make a decision about the new idea

5. Observability - Positive results of the new idea's adoption must be recognizable

1.With regards to introducing the idea of Christian community to the Pacific Northwest, Bread & Wine appears to have provided an innovation with the right elements to be adopted. A church community based off of small groups with the mission of being servant leaders in their neighborhoods holds appealing advantages to Portland's culture as opposed to the centralized church building model.

2. A culture already engaged in social justice issues (feeding the poor, sheltering the homeless, eating healthy) is compatible to a church that seeks to accomplish the same thing.

3. Having never been to Portland, I can't say this definitively. However, I've read the blogs, the books, and asked the questions. People in this part of the country are already looking for ways to stick it to the man and stand up for the little guy. Portland neighborhoods are full of people wanting to do good for others. Showing the community that this is Christ's desire too bridges a perceived gap that exists between human rights and Christian spirituality. The two should overlap, and Bread & Wine makes this a foundational tenet.

4. One thing that most smaller churches are great at is welcoming guests. Its hard to imagine a church with a Gospel community emphasis being anything less than welcoming to people who want to see what they are about. In a way, church communities are in a constant state of trialability.

5. This is the kicker. People will not continue with a community if they perceive their lives to be better off without said community. Many improvements may not be tangible. However, salvation, discipleship, biblical training, service opportunities, and neighborhood renewal result in noticeable results.

Bread & Wine's approach is working. In March 2009 they launched their first gospel community. Flash forward a little more than a year later and they are preparing to add their sixth, each consisting of 10-12 people. For those keeping score at home, that's a 500% growth rate in 14 months in a post-Christian, anti-American church culture. Clearly there is a work of the Holy Spirit going on here that cannot be seen, tasted, touched, or strategically planned by man. But there is a lot to be said for the structure of Bread & Wine and their approach to embrace the culture of Portland in order to bridge the perceived gap between followers of Jesus Christ and a thirst for social justice and genuine community.

As the idea of belonging to a church is being diffused throughout downtown Portland, many more people are likely to join these gospel communities. That's what typically happens when new ideas enter the early adoption phase within a population. Church planters in other American cities should take note of this new approach and pay attention to the model of small group diffusion. While no one can guarantee the absolute best practice for planting a ministry, social and cultural trends should be practiced. In many cases this is happening, and Bread & Wine is just one example. As the Church becomes more innovative in its outreach efforts, connectedness to its external community, and response to social concerns, I believe even post-Christian circles will realize its relevance.