Outreach's List Of Crap-O-La

Okay, I realize that THE list came out several weeks back.  I also realize that, for some, this may be old news.  Still finally, I also realize that I may be a little late getting to the "cool kids" table by blogging about this now.  The truth is I saw Tony Morgan blogging about his church being on some "innovative list" during the Christmas break.  I followed the link over to Outreach's site where I downloaded the PDF file.  I then printed the thing out, realized it was just another "ego stroke" for certain churches and left it in the bathroom in case I ran out of toilet paper!  My basic thought on the whole matter is, "What a ridiculous load of bull excrement and a fine waste trees!"  Why Tony even went to the trouble of convincing Outreach to do it just escapes me.

Before I continue - in the effort of full disclosure - I have a fondness for Tony Morgan and Granger Community Church.  Compass Point has bought some of their church management forms kits (an excellent resource).  We have also used a few Outreach marketing products in the past (a not-so-excellent resource).  I must also admit, however, that I rarely pay either one of them much attention these days.  Tony's blog seems to have become numbers obsessed (i.e., how many blog hits, Sunday attendance at Granger, how many plasma screens they have in each restroom stall, etc.) and Outreach seems more concerned with helping to promote Hollywood movies than serving the local church!  Now back to the list.

The list itself is basically a joke.  I mean, there is no credibility to the thing!  Let's break down some important points here:

The Panel - How is it that the majority of the panel's churches ended up on the list?  I realize that the article said the panel couldn't vote for their own church, but the question is, "How did they all - except for Perry Noble's and Efrem Smith's churches - end up on the list?"  For that matter, why isn't Newspring on the list?  I may be labeled a conspiracy nut, but I believe we better check the "grassy knoll" on this one!!!

The Criteria - While the panel was listed and the winners profiled, there was no mention of a critieria as to what constitutes an "innovative" church.  From what I see in the majority of "the winners" is that the following equation applies:

mega + multi-site + a butt load of technology = innovative

There are exceptions to the rule.  Crossover in Tampa and Imago Dei in Portland are truly innovative in their approaches to the people they are trying to reach.  They are doing things so outside-the-box from normal "cookie-cutter" churches (i.e., hip hop praise music, community gardens, break dancing classes, recording studio for local artists, etc.) that they re-define innovative.  Yet, The Potter's House is also on the list.  What in the hell is so innovative about The Potter's House?  A television preacher reaching people by...wait for it...television.  Ooooo, innovative!!!  Boy, I wish I had come up with that groundbreaking gem of an idea!

Where is Vineyard in Cincinnati - the home of servant evangelism?  Where is Ridgestone in Georgia - that proved that viral marketing can work for churches?  Where is Flamingo Road in South Florida - a church with a rich, long history that reinvented itself to stay relevant?

The Decade - What decade are we determining this list to represent? Is this the most innovative churches today...or ever.  If it's ever, then where is First Baptist Church of Dallas (does anyone remember W.A. Criswell?) or...for that matter...one of the churches that Paul started?  If it's for this decade or the 21st Century (which we are fully into now) then how did Saddleback end up on the list?  Did church leaders in Syria get to vote?  Why is Willowcreek there? They were both innovative at one time...but now?

The Little Guys - If we are talking true innovation, then where are the "little guys"?  Some of the most innovative stuff is being done by church plants less than a year old and an attendance of less than 300. I mentioned in a previous post about Jonathan Herron and Catalyst Church up in Ohio.  Witn no money and plenty of creativity they have become the most talked-about thing on the campus of Kent State University (other than an "incident" back in the 70s)!  Yet, they are not on the list.  How about Summit Church in Florida?  They have no real lead pastor - the entire staff is on equal footing.  I don't understand how it works, but I've seen it in action and it's innovative!    Finally, what about Scum Of The Earth Church up in Denver?  I have no clue how innovative their ministries are, but you gotta stick them on the list for the name alone!!!

The First Annual Top 25 Innovative Churches List article began with the Bob Dyaln lyric, "The times they are a-changing".  Tony and Outreach, please embrace that lyric!  The times are changing and the only people that give a rip about a cheesy innovative churches list are the people that need the "ego boost" of being on them.  Most of us just quietly go about being innovative in our own communities in a never-ending quest to reach people for Christ.  Do us all a favor...drop the "annual" part and let this year's crap-o-la list be the last one!!!

Comments

[yourcriticisyourfriend]

uhhh do I sense a tad bit of hubris here Chris?

[Tyler]

It felt good to read this, it's good to know that there are people out there as cynical as I am.

[Eric]

What about Open Door - Orting, I heard they are so innovative they have church without 5 members. Oh wait, can't vote for my church. (Dood, you vote for me i will vote for you)

Awesome insights man, and I love the fact you dont hide your opinion behind a bunch of politically correct bull puckey. Nice to see someone who knows the truth and speaks it.

[Chris Elrod]

Eddie - I couldn't agree more. I would have never had a problem with Outreach had they listed churches - in no particular order - that were innovative or creative. The fact that they ranked them as if it was a church-version of Miss America was just plain stupid.

My other issue is that the list reads like a "good-old boys" network of the same old churches that are featured in magazines all of the time. Some of them are no longer that innovative and there are dozens more innovative churches that never made the list because they are presently small. Others made the list because they have the most technology crap - that in and of itself is not that innovative.

I guess my biggest beef is that since it was a "contest" Outreach should have used an outside panel - not the pastors of churches that were potential winners. It's like letting the Miss American contestants pick the next Miss America.

All in all, it was just another stupid ranking list to stroke certain egos, push the "cooking-cutter" mentality and pit church against church.

[Eddie]

I guess I'm crazy enough to think Outreach was trying to list some churches that are being creative as a resource. In other words, here are some churches that are doing some "out-of-the box" things. As a staff person in a church that is only 24 months old, I'm always excited to talk to people who are being creative. Some of these churches I'm familiar with, others, not so much. A ranking was probably a bad idea, but I think it was great to highlight these particular groups.

[Chris Elrod]

Tony, I'm speechlees (which is rare)! Great reply. You rock!!!

When you get the screens in the toilets call me, I wanna come to Granger and give them a whirl!!! :-)

[tony morgan]

We don't have any plasma screens in our restroom stalls. But I think it would be cool if we did. :-)

tony