Found this post at the Apprising Ministries blog, concerning Rob Bell's Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids — not to be confused with the Mars Hill in Seattle, pastored by complimentarian Mark Driscoll who, last International Women's Day, took some serious heat for statements allegedly not in support of women in church leadership.
Rob Bell, who by all accounts is egalitarian, is pastor of what various observers say is the "the fastest growing church in America." He's certainly got a unique way of expressing the timeless message of the Gospel. And he's got a church of 10,000 that he started in 1999 in a gymnasium.
What many don't know is that gymnasium was pretty full the first Sunday. Somewhere between 700 to 1,000 people were there from the get-go. That's more people than a lot of pastors ever see come through a church in its entire existence (the great majority of U.S. churches number 100 or less).
Many of those attending that first Sunday apparently knew him well. He had helped oversee their spiritual development for four to five years as a pastor on staff at Ed Dobson's nearby megachurch — something Bell neglected to mention in his account of his church plant in his new book Velvet Elvis. Hmmmmmm.
Wouldn't want to take anything away from what he's done or doing, but ... you've got a better shot at 10,000 when you start with 1,000 than the emergent folks meeting in someone's living room.
What's troubling about his story is that it sounds more amazing than it is. You get the image of this guy just kinda falling into ministry (his first formal ministry is a patched-together talk he gives at a retreat when the billed speaker didn't show), and then after he gets some encouragement and completes his seminary education, he goes to Grand Rapids and just wants to preach the Gospel and sort of watches this church spring up around him. He's as surprised by it as you are! "We had no idea how many people would show up that first Sunday." Yeah, but Rob, you probably had a fair idea. I mean, you had a very successful teaching ministry at one of the largest churches in the country for five years. Since everyone at Dobson's church knew for quite some time that you and "several other people" were going to go set up shop in that gym, how likely was it that you'd preach to a room full of empty chairs?
Don't get me wrong. I've seen some of his work, and he has a way of making the Gospel come alive. And truth is, there are a lot of pastors who could start with that 700-1,000 and walk away empty in five years. If you're into church growth, it's an amazing story even without the mythic implication of 0-10,000 in six years. I don't intend here to take anything away from what he's managed to do. It is remarkable. And I believe with all my heart that God's in it, too. But it does rob it of some of its mythic shock and awe when you find that Bell got to bypass, rather than find a way to overcome, those tough-to-get-past church growth plateaus (90, 125, 225 and 350) everyone used to write so much about.
Bell says he's not into church growth. The story that he refused to let his leadership team put up a sign outside the gym is, no doubt, true. Didn't have to. He says the church grew by word of mouth. Probably did. Several thousand mouths, apparently, assuming most adults at Dobson's church knew about the plans.
Bell's not into church growth, but his church plant is an almost by-the-book demonstration of classic church growth principles, developed and first taught, by the way, at Fuller Seminary, his spiritual alma mater.
Bell's not into marketing, either. Really? I happened to pick up his book off the rack at our church book room this morning and found it intriguing. I actually read his abbreviated account of his church's beginnings, which was why I Googled him this afternoon and came to find the above. There are, oh, 70-80 books, maybe, on the racks at church, and dozens of music tapes and other stuff. I'd just stepped in to sorta hide out, because it was that noisy period between services from which we ultra-introverts occasionally need a break. Why did that book catch my eye? Easy: It was smaller than the rest. Had a plain white cover and, in tiny type, running top-to-bottom near the upper right-hand corner, it said, simply Velvet Elvis. In a room full of flash, with authors names emblazoned bigger than book titles, it stood out like a beacon. "What's this about, I wonder?" I said as picked it up. I just hadta pick it up. That, my friends, is textbook good marketing. "In a crowded marketplace, differentiate your product." I'm not criticizing. You write a book, why? Presumably, because you want people to read it. It was good packaging. It did exactly what it was intended to do.
I have nothing against those who feel it is time to update or reinvent or rediscover the gospel. I guess I'll even live with the idea that Jesus had a "secret" message that we're just now unveiling. But this reinvention process is not new. Every generation has repackaged the faith to fit its present realities, complete with revised prayer books, "modern" bible tranlations (can't wait to see the "postmodern" bibles) and all the rest. But, unlike some, I don't pretend for one minute that this repackaging effort somehow escapes being marketing. When you repackage an old product to appeal to a new audience, that's Marketing 101.
The important question is, when you do your marketing, are you telling the truth about your product or trying to make it look like something it isn't?
Rob has been pretty clear about the way the Church grew. I read an interview he gave to the Episcopal magazine Church Times in which he talked about the number who turned up at the first show. He also mentioned it on a Podcast. It isn't like he has said something happened that hasn't. This seems more like mischief from Apprising ministries who have a thing about Rob for some reason.
ReplyDeleteI would have to say that when I read Velvet Elvis I had the impression that the church just sprang up around him and that he started with a very small group.
ReplyDeleteccanuck,
ReplyDeleteSame here. Rob bell may have made clear the circumstances in other settings, but — as I said in my post — he neglected to mention it in the book.
Also, I didn't get the impression that Apprising Ministries had it in for Bell. The post I read outlined the very great effort they made to confirm their facts and make contact with Bell's organization. I read nothing at all inflammatory or derogatory. I heard an honet concern about the fact that the story, as told in the book, leads the reader to the impression that Bell began with a pretty small group. Certinaly tath's the impression I cane away with, and so did ccanuck.
Please hear me when I say I'm an admirer of Bell's. I think he has a way fo speaking aobut he Gospel that really communicates. And it is nothing short of remarkable that he's done what he's done.
All I'm saying is that it is unfortunate that the story in the book leaves a reader who has not previously been privy to the details a false impression.
And a lot of pople who read that book won't have gotten the details elsewhere. But when they do, I suspect they'll have a similar reaction to mine. What I worry about is that their reaction might be worse.
And I'm not saying he intentionally misrepresented the facts. But I am saying that it's important to make an effort NOT to misrepresent the facts, when you're writing a book which is to be a tool you use to spread the kingdom message.