I have not dropped off of the Blogosphere again.  i have actually been working on yet another graphic, affectionately dubbed “Art’s Charts” by Marty Duren.  At least I think that it is affectionate.  Maybe I’m deluding myself again.

If I am, I can only say that life’s more fun that way.

In the meantime, I need to prepare for that post by writing this one regarding culture as it relates to transitioning a church (or any organization, for that matter).

Culture can simply be defined as a system of values commonly held within a community.  These values guide the actions of the individuals and the whole.  Culture is also fluid as each individual within the community influences the others to increase or decrease its specific values.  So, culture is not uniform across a community.

As an example, within the world community, America has its own culture, distinguishable from England, French, Russian, Ugandan, Korean, Japanese, Spanish, Mexican and Kenyan… just to name a few.  Yet even within America, the differences between regions (North/South, Midwest/Northeast/West Coast) and even within regions (Louisiana/Georgia) is obvious to those immersed in those cultures.

All of this is to say that culture is as specific as the community to which it belongs.

For American churches, we deal with a massive host of ingredients: National, regional, state, local, evangelical/liturgical, denominational (or “non-denominational”) and so on.

The sway of these components create expectations among the individuals, and those expectations are as diverse as the individuals within the community.

If culture is a fluid, dynamic system of commonly held values that govern our behaviors, then there will be a fluid, dynamic of commonly held expectations that everyone involved will adhere to those values.  This in itself creates and holds tension within the community.

To attempt transition means that you are saying to the community that certain commonly held values are no longer held as high as they once were while certain other things previously not valued should be.  Some are likely to respond well as you will be championing similar values.

For others, it will seem that you are telling them that they are and have been wrong.

That may not be what you are trying to say (most times it shouldn’t be), but that’s the undertone and it will be noted.  And, it creates resistance.

It is why transitioning a church is one of the most difficult things we can do.  It is why deconstructing everything is important.  You need to understand the current culture to influence it.  You need to know what is going to cause people to throw out the anchor, and what is going to motivate them to make a change.

Questions to ask:

1. What is the history of the church?
2. What do they consider to be the “signature” of the church to the community?  What does that tell you of the values of the church?
3. Who makes up the church?  What are the demographics?
4. How open to change are they?  Have they realized that a shift in values is necessary?  To what extent are they ready?
5. Find the primary influencers within the community. What do they value? How open to change are they?
6. What does the church “do?”  What it does should tell you what it values.

Posts with related content

• November 11, 2010 -- Casting Vision (1)
• November 3, 2010 -- Institutional v. Missional: 12 Marks of the Missional Church (4)
• February 23, 2010 -- Transitions: Deconstruction… Yes (3)
• February 18, 2010 -- Transitions: Deconstructing… everything? (2)
• February 9, 2010 -- The Missional Church: A short, simple video (0)

Tags: Church, Transitioning