传播与青年事务总监Patrick Scriven’s Ministries

下次我听到牧师争辩说,教会真正需要的是更具创新精神的牧师时,我可能会不知所措。唐’t get me wrong. I have nothing against 革新 or against innovative pastors in principle. The church certainly needs transformation and we desperately need folks with new ideas. My problem is with our temptation to locate 革新 with the clergy and the way it perpetuates a savior mythology, one that oppresses them as much as it does us wee lay folk.

埃弗里特·罗杰斯(Everett M. Rogers)以在他的书中推广解释技术采用生命周期的理论而闻名, 创新扩散. While the theory was originally developed studying farmers, it has been applied widely to other fields (no pun intended) to help us understand how 革新 occurs. Rogers visually presented the adoption of new technology with a bell curve similar to the one accompanying this 文章.

据罗杰斯说, 创新者 (约占人口的2.5%)受过更好的教育,更富裕并且更注重风险。 早期采用者 were younger and more educated. They tended to be community leaders but were less prosperous than 创新者. The 早期多数 较为保守,但仍对新想法持开放态度,并在社区中活跃并对邻居产生影响。的 后期多数 与以前的人群相比,他们年龄更大,受教育程度较低,相当保守并且在社交活动方面也较弱。最后 落后者 非常保守,拥有最小的农场和可用资本。他们也是年龄最大,受教育程度最低的人。 1

在考虑向教堂提出申请之前,我想先对Geoffrey A. Moore在这本名为 穿越鸿沟。摩尔采用了罗杰(Roger)模型的基础知识并将其应用于高科技产品的营销,提出了“ 裂口 在。。之间 '有远见的人”(创新者和早期采用者)和“实用主义者’ (the early/late majorities and laggards). He argues that the most difficult step in the adoption of 革新 is this one between the early adopters and the early majority. As as early adopter of technology whose been burned once or twice by the amazing product that never really caught on, his theory rings true.

As fascinating as these theories are, I’m only interested in them (or to be more accurate, my Wikipedia-level interpretation of them) because of how they might allow us to see the process of change in the church differently. Permit me to be deliberately provocative for the sake of our conversation here. Let me suggest that the pastor is exactly the wrong person to bring 革新 into an existing church and that Moore’s 裂口 is the reason why.

Let me suggest that the pastor is exactly the wrong person to bring 革新 into an existing church…

When a skilled pastor brings a new idea to an existing community I imagine they would have little problem getting that group of early adopters to agree to how amazing their 革新 is. Together, they might plot out a course for those new small groups, or for that trendy evening service, but how many of you can relate to the difficulty of getting the 实用主义者 on board? Might we consider that this is Moore’s 裂口 at work?


If we are to move forward, what the church really needs are innovative lay people; willing to adopt, suggest, and try new things. When a lay person puts forth a new idea and builds their group of advocates (early adopters), their 革新, particularly if it challenges the church culture, will still hit Moore’s 鸿沟。 The difference however is that now the pastor is free to insert their authority and influence to help good ideas to bridge this gap. And when they do so, they also create goodwill and affirm the gifts of their laity to boot.

Our churches need, desperately, to become places of change. While the occasional new idea from the pastor can be good modeling, the pastor that innovates continuously sucks the air out of the church and leaves no room for 革新 elsewhere. Our churches would be better served by clergy who excelled at creating and nurturing cultures of 革新.

I would expect that some might say that this sentiment is nice but they know, or serve, churches where creating a culture of 革新 is impossible. Where we find this to be true we should be quick to lock the doors and shutter the windows. Before we do this however, we should consider that there is a difference between a church that continuously rejects its pastor’s new ideas and one that refuses to create their own when given a chance.

The Spirit of God is the church’s true innovator. Relocating the process of 革新 where we know the Spirit resides – the community – is our most faithful path forward.

So, how might we create, nurture and sustain cultures of 革新 with the lay people of the church? I have a few thoughts but I’d rather hear yours. Leave a comment below. And then 点击这里 第二部分。

*如果您不’t know what ‘twerking’ is, 相信 me, your life is not incomplete.


  1. 其实– you’re completely in target that 革新 needs to come from (and will come from) laity. But in a 成熟 structure like ours, the 创新者 will be frustrated and blocked –甚至被赶出去只是重新开始– if clergy do not use the pivotal influence of their position in the organization to nurture an environment where 革新 is valued, celebrated and encouraged.

    • Agreed. Any thoughts on how clergy can retool their skills and interaction with the congregation to foster and support lay 创新者?

  2. 牧师的职责包括监督整个会众的健康;这可能包括教众– especially 创新者, early adopters and early majorities – about these very dynamics of change, so that 创新者 and early adopters stay in community with — and don’t hate and browbeat — all those who don’跳上潮流。

    • 那’重要的一点。讨厌和吓row已故的收养者和落后者不会’除了引入负能量之外,它确实做出了贡献。但是我很好奇,如果这些群体中的人故意让自己成为障碍,人们将如何前进。从我有限的教会经历来看,他们似乎不太可能让他们屈从于由懒惰者发起的变革,但这仍然是一种可能性。

      • 有时候’神职人员的作用是帮助落后者闲逛,为他们提供一个安全的地方。有效的牧师可以阻止他们攻击变化,但不能使他们感到必须“come on board”在他们准备好之前。

  3. 我同意斯蒂芬所说的话,甚至会更进一步:我越来越坚信我们的结构已经超越了“mature”(由于恐惧和古代)使边缘化石化,长期参与其中的人们已经看到足够“innovation”使自己免于真正的转变。我还认为,还有一个人性的基本问题:我们如何寻找那些对我们的结构投入最大的人来改变?我们的神职人员,我们的长期懒惰– even our bishops –是那些因对教会的经历而受教养的人。保留的更改可能来自中心的权威,但转换的更改几乎总是来自边缘地区的不满。

    • 感谢您的评论托德。您所指的任何例子‘边缘上的不满?’ I’我对这种变化如何从边缘转移到主流非常感兴趣。

  4. 你这样说” While the occasional new idea from the pastor can be good modeling, the pastor that innovates continuously sucks the air out of the church and leaves no room for 革新 elsewhere.”我的经验是,是创新者让那些对尝试新事物不感兴趣或不愿让雇用的专业人员(=牧师)从事工作的教会从中吸走空气。

    This said, you are spot on saying that churches need to be centers of change and 革新 (= creativity = excitement = 活力). So, how do churches become such, and who will lead the change? Trained professionals again?

    • 克雷格(Craig),我怀疑许多人会分享这种经验,我当然不会’反对它的现实。看来类似于我们在敬拜中遇到的困难。我们’我们已经允许事物保持如此长的时间不变,以至于崇拜通常是一种驯化(和停滞)的动物,而不是挑战,鼓舞和惊奇的事物。

  5. 我认为我们所有的牧师都意识到,后来的采用者可能永远不会真正参与创新。因此,创新的牧师实际上形成了“tribes,”正如塞思·戈丁(Seth Godin)所说,在他们的机构教会中。像一个“教堂内的教堂”即使有些人从未参与过创新活动,创新思想也会随着时间的流逝而滚雪球。例如,开展当代敬拜活动可能只从一小部分人开始,但是即使传统的信徒从不采用它。坐在等待创新而不了解这些动态的牧师不会看到太大的变化。创新的牧师支持并鼓励创新的宽容度,允许他们跳出框框思考。同样,创新的懒惰随后会鼓舞并鼓励创新的牧师,慢慢地打破这种局面“frozen” or “calcified”我们许多教会努力打破的制度主义。

    • I’d喜欢在教会中看到更多这种行为。给予许可和鼓励似乎是健康生态系统的关键要素。感谢您的评论。

  6. 我认为给予许可至关重要。会众需要了解,当创新者提出具有吸引力的新想法时,他们必须得到会众的许可(祝福吗?)–即使并非所有人都同意。我看到的问题是,当某事不能成功时,外行人不愿再试一次。我们如何培养实验的气氛?

    • 好问题。我想知道,对于精神领袖来说,设定社区每年将要做的XX件事的公共目标是否有帮助?留下一些实际的项目是挑战和鼓励吗?

  7. I would venture to say in most churches a pastor could list off the late adopters or laggards. The description of this group leads me to believe they need more time learning about and understanding the new 革新. Why not start with this group by approaching them first and getting them on board. I would venture to say they are most often the ones left behind with new ideas and become frustrated when something new comes along that they do not understand. I have found when I approach this group first and spend time helping them understand and get on board before I bring it to the rest of the church, it goes more smoothly and there is less fear of change.


    • 感谢嘉莉的评论!摩尔的一部分’潜在的理论是知道您正在与哪个小组交谈并以一种可以与他们建立联系的方式进行交谈,但这确实建议从愿意听的人开始。耶稣也是这样做的,并鼓励他的门徒在讲道时做。您可能要指出的关键是,当耶稣寻找饥饿的人和准备好的人时,世界经常会选择强大而流行的地方。


  8. As a(nother) layperson, I believe you are so spot on here! There is nothing so energizing as an empowered laity that serves in partnership with their clergy leaders. At my local church, we are experiencing early stages of a process very similar to what you describe with the laity serving as 创新者 and early adopters. I’我很高兴看到圣灵将我们从这里带到何处。

  9. 帕特里克(Patrick),您的文章很有趣,而且很有启发性,对于您的读者发送的许多回复也是如此。


    上述引用中缺少的对我来说是两者的含义“innovators”和采用者;即,您和想要创新的读者是什么,以及采用什么样的采用者?对我来说’s not enough to say lets be 创新者, since not all 革新s are right, true, helpful, etc. Indeed some such proposals can be harmful not only to the church, but also to others who may be receiving ideas and/or demands that are not in keeping with the Jesus way of life as understood by the Wesleyan model of gratitude for freely received grace springs us into inclusion against exclusion of would-be followers, and builds the ways for following, , not walls walling out others.


    • 感谢阅读文章Bob和提出的问题。

      我不’不能定义您要问的大多数事情,我想我没有’t do so for a reason. I believe the question of the validity of a particular 革新 really is important, as you suggest, but it was beyond the scope of what I was looking to cover. I could say that there are certainly possible 革新s, ones that could be successful by some standard, that are also unfaithful. This is more of a spiritual discernment issue rather than a strategic one but it is very important all the same. Thanks for pointing it out.



  10. 俗人有充分的条件去了解他们在教会中所扮演的角色。牧师担心的是,牧师认为领导者的角色是引导教会结构的每一步。在教会中心内外,教会都是生活的基础。神职人员是通过热,冷,风和雨将织物固定在一起的针脚,以使花样的设计保持比例。在使用此简单方法的地方,您会发现会众的大小,强度,意志和能力支持社区以及文化,社会和变革问题。


  11. 我发现的困难是,在许多会众中’s with whom I’ve served, there are *no* 创新者 in the lay part of the community. So I’ve发现,正如您上面所建议的那样,我经常不得不重建自己的“social capital,” to be able to introduce 革新 that I understand to be important to the congregation’的持续部。

  12. Sometimes a Pastor has to drop suggestions for 革新s here and there, and just leave them be, as seeds. The ones that take root in the lay people’想象力将不断增长。在第一个建议之后的一两年后,一个外行人会想到一个基本相似的想法,认为这是他们自己的想法。

    • 这是一个不错的策略,因为播种会为其他人和外行人留出空间,成为该过程的一部分。这确实需要领导者要有信心和耐心。

  13. 种子是思想的源头,因为耶稣做了几个比他预期的寓言,而不是像门徒们要求他的事奉那样。我们经常将计划视为即时结果或待定结果。


  14. I’m not sure it’s an either/or proposition: not black/white choice between whether clergy should be 创新者 OR enable lay people to innovate, not a choice between clergy as “innovators”或神职人员施加影响“chasm.”我也不确定神职人员(或其他人)有固定数量的“social capital.”

    To begin with, I think it is more important for clergy to recognize their gifts and predispositions in reference to the 革新 adoption cycle and apply themselves where they are most gifted: If you are gifted in 革新, the put your gifts to work in the 革新 part of the cycle. If you are gifted at helping people persist thru the 裂口, put your gifts to work there. The “social capital”对我来说,争论似乎是一条红鲱鱼:听起来更像是固定派而不是上帝统治。

    但我认为,也许更重要的是重新思考创新的意义。如果我们认为我们要提出一个真正新的东西,那是 ’有一句谚语把烤肉串放在上面吗?如果我们认为我们正在提出并向我们作为被任命领导者的社区出售新产品,那肯定是来自于等级制/权力/控制/政治资本的思维方式,因为这样做确实会吞噬很多政治首都。

    I think a much healthier way conceptualizing what we as clergy (and leaders generally) are trying to achieve in the 革新 diffusion cycle as it applies to churches, is to think in terms of “emergent” 革新 (not emerging church, just 紧急的): that is, discerning what the congregation, in its deepest, most authentic, most image-of-God self is wanting to become (or dreaming of becoming), and then being the namer/articulator/language creator for that 紧急的 vision/desire/dream, and the faciliator to the congregation of allowing/encouraging/enabling that vision/desire/dream to spread.

  15. Roadblocks push me to go around. When the newsletter editor resisted my pieces, I started emails. Because a staff person was controlling communication, I went to meetings and intentionally spread what was up in other committees, adding potential 革新s as “我们正在考虑。 。 。”从而为那些和其他可能性打下基础。创新吸引了那些寻求创新的人。对于他们,您可以给予鼓励和支持。

    • 每种情况都因其特定的上下文而有所不同。一世’m glad you found a way to make things work in yours. I might suggest that people are less drawn to 革新 than they are to movement. Innovation itself can hit or miss but the community that is try new things because they are trying to get to mission is always attractive to the right people.

  16. 亲爱的帕特里克– it’很高兴看到这些信息共享,尤其是摩尔’罗杰斯的扩展’ original work. My DMin in evangelism was based on what happens if we consider the Gospel of Jesus Christ as an 革新 …我们可以从罗杰斯和摩尔那里学到什么,以鼓励其采用?

    该项目在线,任何人都可以看到… the section most dealing with how church systems derail 革新 is Seminar Two – http://www.disciplewalk.com/files/Seminar_Two_Dialogue.pdf

    这是两个视觉寓言,它们说明了摩尔’s viewpoint:



    My primary conclusion was that churches need 革新s … but that 创新者 have a communication disability in terms of presenting their ideas in a way that they can be accepted by the pragmatic majority. And the mistakes they make in promoting an 革新 typically make the situation worse. THANKS FOR SHARING THIS!

    • 感谢您的评论,并感谢您阅读本文。一世’将检查您发布的链接;喜欢在教堂灯泡上的应用。

  17. I’m actually working on a book applying this technology marketing model to church 革新. I read Moore’90年代末我在软件启动公司的项目管理团队时写的书’s. In Moore’在他的书中,他指出了早期采用者(或有远见者)的四个特征,它们疏远了早期多数派(或实用主义者)。这些因素阻碍了成功“跨越鸿沟” for great 革新s. The characteristics are…
    1)缺乏对同事价值的尊重’经验。 (教堂解释:神职人员’如果不尊重会众的经验,兴奋可能会无效。)
    2) Taking a greater interest in technology than in their industry. (Church interpretation: The clergy, or chief idea marketer, must be careful to convey that the central mission of the church is above any particular program or 革新. We must always demonstrate the “kingdom purpose.”
    3)无法认识到现有产品基础架构的重要性。 (教会的解释:神职人员经常垃圾谈论现有的教会以让路给新想法。这不会给实用主义者带来热烈的模糊感。人们必须先听到不会改变的东西,然后才能接受必须改变的东西。)
    4)总体破坏性。 (教会的解释:实用主义者不希望牧师和他们的创新伙伴总是摇摇晃晃。他们需要将其视为系统的演进,并有可能实现平稳过渡。)


    I saw this pattern hold true when I was a software engineer and project manager for a startup in the DC area. I see similar patterns as I seek to be a midwife of 革新 as pastor in a church.

    • 简要研究“冥想效果” http://tinyurl.com/cqhspel

      负面的创新,仅和/或主要服务于创新“the self” tends to fail, while 革新 the stems from love, compassion and offered in service to others in wisdom, tends to blossom.


  18. 谈话来得很晚,但是我很欣赏这次讨论的体贴,而且创造环境进行实验并让外行人自由地贡献力量比仅依靠牧师来创新(更重要的是定义)更为重要(更健康)。 。我非常感谢Rob Dyer’指出牧师必须始终专注于教会’的核心任务或王国目的。



    1)波特兰的弹出式教堂–由主教牧师管理。我喜欢这个设计的一部分是因为’打算永远跑– only as long as it met needs and had momentum. 那 way things can be tried, and if they fail, then not as big a deal – we weren’试图建立新的传统–只要尝试一些我们认为可以满足某些需求的东西即可。

    2)去年MailChimp创始人Ben Chestnut在青年卡特尔峰会上的讲话: http://bit.ly/15BOlb3 我喜欢的是强调做事。他说,“我雇用了疯狂的人,让他们反复失败。” It’在尝试的过程中,在正确解决问题之前将其弄错了30次,必须使该位置充满活力–不必担心,受到威胁或好像所有举动都是最后一步。

    • 感谢您的评论,尤其是Mail Chimp的报价。

      I imagine our risk aversion may have something to do with our struggles to support 革新 in our existing communities.

  19. 恕我直言,阻碍创新免于懒惰的第一件事是我们的教会仍在努力运作的committee肿的委员会结构。停止选举人选。当然,您需要一些管理人员(大多数州都要求您具有非营利身份),并且您可能需要一些值得信赖的人担任执事或圣餐助理或类似人员(取决于您的传统),也许还需要一个被选为负责建筑物/金钱/合同。但是对于上帝’为求停止选举任务,教育和音乐等委员会。选举或雇用事工协调员,让人们在有时间的时候自愿参加。请注意,这在大多数教会最成功的项目是存在的选举董事会和委员会之外的那些(在我的教会’一直以来,它都是妇女组织的圣诞节博览会’协会或一些这样的事情)没有人被当选为女性’s Association…你才露面该组中的90岁老人是我的创新者。

  20. 会众的创新似乎来自各个领域。作为牧师,我喜欢创新,但是随着时间的流逝,我喜欢激发创新文化。我的许多好点子都死在了葡萄树上,我让他们放弃了。更具可行性的创新似乎已从星期日学校的教室,团契活动和纳特尔的谈话中产生。它的工作方式是这样的:大量的提及,想法或兴趣,引起了另一个人的注意。最终,工作人员和委员会听说了它,并且随着它的传播,这个想法/兴趣继续保持吸引力。确实,大多数人认为这与事工有关。我将这些称为会众的线索,这些线索有机地上升,但随后得到讲坛或委员会的结构以增强动力。因此,与其希望委员会能够为会众带来越来越有趣的新颖性,不如让委员会和工作人员善于听取会众的声音。一旦会众知道您在听,他们就不会’不想停止集思广益和分享。

  21. 多年来,我一直试图说这件事,因为牧师越来越多“responsible”数量下降。谢谢!如果我们的牧师愿意给予许可,我们的宽容者完全有能力发展教会。

  22. 在卫理公会教堂的生活中的某个时刻,开始在神学院中进行文职培训似乎很相关,以帮助未来的牧师帮助会众中的成年求职者通过冥想培训唤醒古老的世俗灵性技巧,以使内在悟性得以发现。内在的神能量。

    部长们似乎没有准备,因此不愿讨论“Chris Consciousness” — http://tinyurl.com/22wowwz



  23. 从中产生的想法“common folk”并传播到整个人口中,然后被视为领导者的人采用/整理和鼓励,这是开放系统的核心。自上而下出现的想法在民主制度中会遭到自动抵制。教会是政治有机体,其开放社会中的追随者在教会内的运作方式与在教会外的政治方式相同。领导者帮助人们树立和实现

  24. Seems like I have seen this chart before. Pastors can be 创新者 but first we have to be pastors. Pastors who would like to lead their churches to a new level and exhibit change should do these two things:



    Transformation is only possible through hard work, relationship building, credibility in integrity and 相信ing the Spirit.


  25. 今天,大多数外行人都在忙于谋生自己的家庭或自己。当他们确实有时间去听牧师的声音时,他们希望得到一个鼓舞人心的信息,这将使他们的生活更加轻松。他们不’认为世界可以改变,并且双方都从媒体上发展了批判性的判断态度。祝他们好运,让他们参与除自身利益以外的任何事情。您作为牧师的工作是在圣灵的帮助下使我们摆脱困境。

  26. 考虑到我自己和曾两次碰壁的创新者/早期适配器,一次或两次起作用的是,如果某些早期的适配器是电阻器的子代或后代,它们可能会有所帮助。父母或祖父母通常只希望看到他们的儿子或女儿或孙子在教堂里变得活跃起来,并会消除一些抵制并帮助出售新的倡议。我还了解到,您可以做一些这样的事情,但是为了更好地完成新想法,您不必做其他事情。然后您很快就会通过银行,发现自己正处于被选岛抛弃的边缘。

  27. 帕特里克 I think we are beyond the need for 革新, or revitalization, or renewal, or whatever word is used to suggest that the Church just needs to find new ways to do the old things. The fact that this conversation centers on the roles of clergy and laity points to a fundamental flaw in our being: we are an organization that tries to organize the experience of connecting with the divine.

    我们需要回到成为一个增进人民的社区的想法。’ chances of encountering and partnering with God for a new creation. If we start there, then all bets are off as to what we as a community would do. Worship? Maybe not. Study the Bible? 我不’不知道。社区将共同决定哪些方法可以增进与上帝的关系。社区中的每个人都会有自己的做法,而在志同道合的人组成的社区中,他们会寻求相同的东西,从而对这些做法进行补充。


    但是,这种新的生存方式可能​​会在我们最小的教堂中(少于20个人参加礼拜)。这些小组很小,足以进行有关信仰和社区目的的真实对话。 15%,即我们的UM教堂中的5000教堂属于此类别。如果教会的等级制度想做任何有用的事情,它将找到一种方法来帮助这些最小的会众开始发现与上帝建立关系的全新方式。

  28. Thank you for the excellent and thought-provoking 文章. I just finished facilitating a training called Moving Mountains: How to be an Agent of Change. I used this graph and it led to great discussion. Two points I make though are 1.) There is loss and fear in 革新 and it is important to honor and address it respectfully. 2.) There is value added by each group in the chart. Instead of seeing one group as a problem, see the benefits and grow through them. For instance 落后者 (pessimists) often see pitfalls that 创新者 and 早期采用者 don’t。如果每个职位都可以尊重其他职位的价值,则可以实现更好的计划和结果。对我来说,最好的改变是深思熟虑的改变。



    • 安妮,你说的时候以为你很钉“总是教先改变过程的动力”。当所有领导者和领导者都在同一页面上时,可以使他们更加信任!

  29. 约翰福音15章允许我们尝试然后学习(即结出果实或尝试失败)。谦卑的因素是在结出果实的一个季节之后出现的。后退一步并进行评估。这个新想法是否需要修剪/切断? (请阅读约翰15。在这里可能会有所帮助。)

  30. 我想我’m having a problem with the model. Sometimes necessity spurs invention. Oftentimes 创新者 are not that wealthy. Need sometimes has to be in the equation which could activate 革新 from an unexpected source. Also,would this model look the same category-attribution-wise?

    • 需求绝对需要成为方程式的一部分,即使只是被视为需求。我可以’不能想象一个想法如果没有它就成功了很长时间。谢谢你的想法。

  31. 我们需要神职人员,他们是主要的协助者,鼓励和培养人性观念,并在会众中产生积极性。神职人员可能会问闲杂的问题,例如以下问题:我们如何才能更多地参与社区活动?我们可以为会员的个人成长提供什么?我们如何成长为教会?我们可以为社区提供什么?神职人员可以向会众抛出问题,但可以让会众提出想法,然后鼓励和培养这些成员,并在教会团体内引起对这些想法的热情。

  32. 有时,规模不大且疲倦的会众很难提出想法。他们需要的提示是有效的例子,即使它们不是旨在持续很长时间的小型研讨会。从中,新的主意似乎开始兴起,然后部长可以转而成为那种鼓励,培育的促进者。但是,我同意,通俗的想法会更好,更强大,并且会带来持久的变化。

  33. 帕特里克



    Statistically, in the CotN there is a noticeable decline in Evangelists as the CotN became more established. 我不’认为这根本不是具有讽刺意味的,而是指示更大的系统问题。


  34. I think that the 革新 pastors are most called to bring is coaxing the culture to a state of 革新. Like a DJ at a dance, it is the job of the pastor to invite people to dance with the Spirit. Humor, humility, and the art of surprise are all examples of the best practices for the DJ. The best spinner knows when to change the music, trade lyrics, and move people to find their own rhythm.