Why I don’t rate ‘Church Rater’
10 Nov 2009
I count Jim Henderson as a good friend, he’s had a big influence in my life, so the critique of his latest site re-launch ‘Church Rater‘, needs to be placed in that context.
Also that he asked me to post publicly my critique of it. Normally I don’t review sites/resources I don’t like, and just avoid them. But for Jim here are some of my thoughts about the site and why it’s problematic for me.
Most of these comments I have already run by Jim in private when we first talked about the site, that was eventually closed down in February 2008. So dusting those thoughts off and updating them for the Church Rater relaunch, here goes:
1. Why Focus on Sunday Services?: When Off the Map has sought to promote the notion that church is more than a Sunday Service, why the focus on reviewing Sunday Services? I’m sure many of the churches reviewed have a lot more going on in them than a their Sunday Service. How about the reviewers enter into the life of church communities and review things other than Sundays?
2. Consumerism: Then there is the nature of ‘rating’. I know I’m not interested in someone visiting one Sunday service and giving us a 5* rating. I fear it undermines something else Off the Map was set up for, deep and thoughtful reflection and critique of Church. Church needs critique and I love the kind that Off the Map introduced me to. However this way of assessing churches, seems captive to the problem of the way we select out church involvement, and undermines the best (at least for me) of Off the Map.
3. Polarisation: So those people who like their churches will get on the site and give glowing reviews, those who hate churches will give their scathing reviews, and maybe some thoughtful ones will take place in between. Because of no 1 & 2 above, I think polarisation is more likely the outcome of rating sunday services.
Perhaps, non emerging church fundamentalists, could set up a ‘missional church rater’ system, visit some non sunday service meetings of groups, and let slip that they are ‘evangelicals’ to see what happens. Then they could post the horrifying judgmental responses from the ‘tolerant’ missional people, and easily pour scorn on them, and miss all the good taking place in those communities.
I fear church rater as it is set up, preaches to the choir on both sides.
4. Location of ‘raters’: Now this isn’t an ad hominem argument I’m about to offer and remember the context of my friendship with Jim Henderson mentioned above, and this is something I have run by Jim before. Given Jim’s own post-church ecclesiology and non commitment to a local congregation (unless that has changed recently), what is the qualification for rating a local congregation? Again that doesn’t mean Jim and Off the Map can’t critique church in valuable ways, they do, but through so many other ways than ‘Church Rater’. Why would someone convinced that for themselves and for many others that the nature of church is non-particular, critique Sunday services when they don’t take part in one themselves, outside of giving a reviews or guest speaking at them?
Also Casper the Atheist. I’ve never met him, and I’m sure he is a great guy, and I’d like him. But once the novelty has worn off of an atheist reviewing your Sunday service, what is left? Has Casper become a professional atheist sunday service reviewer? Again I’m all for us understanding how church seems to people outside, especially those trying to find God and faith. But if Casper visited my community, I’d take his feedback with a pinch of salt.
I want Casper to find faith in Christ, to hand over his basis for reality to Jesus to order his life around the mission of Jesus with others, which our church is trying to do, and I’m sure get’s wrong many times. But I have no interest in a good write up from a professional atheist church reviewer, no offense Casper. I doubt if it would help people looking for a church to take part in our community, or atheists to give us a try.
Now if Casper visited us, I’d say please come to something other than a Sunday service, and don’t bother if the only reason is to put a review up on Church Rater of our Sunday service. Come along and see if you can find Jesus with us, and serve him with us, and write about your experience of Him instead.
Tagged: Church Rater, Resources
31 comments
Trackback
Comment by rodney neill
11.06 am on 10 Nov 2009
Have to agree with all your have said Jason.
I was at Greenbelt a few years ago where a variety of ‘alt worship’ services run by different groups took place in the space of a few days. It became a very competitive ‘who had the coolest/most interesting service’ consumeristic window shopping experience for the crowd I was with from my home location rather than letting themselves be challenged by each service they attended…….a bit like a religious X factor.
all the best
Rodney
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
12.59 pm on 12 Nov 2009
Tnx Rodney. The temptation to rate what we do as ‘cool’ is hard wired into our generation I think.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Katie
2.49 pm on 10 Nov 2009
I can see that this might be useful for people discovering Christianity on their own – of which there are a lot – for a way of feeling more comfortable about what you might encounter, ticking off some of the unknowns as it were.
However, that said, I have been in some churches where my family was the only congregation, and some that were strong vibrant and full to bursting. I am not sure that the first church would have got 4 stars if anyone had visited, but then again it formed an important part of spiritual upbringing.
I think it’s a difficult thing to do to rate a church and it leaves the power of God to move people wherever they are out of the equation, which isn’t a brilliant idea.
Katie
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
1.01 pm on 12 Nov 2009
Hi Katie, great comment. How do you rate a church and should you? Some big questions.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Paul
8.23 pm on 10 Nov 2009
Thanks Jase, a thoughtful, helpful and constructive critiqu. Good modelling!
I am struck having read the book “the year of living biblically” by the idea of someone trying to immerse themselves in the rules of the bible and trying to live that out. It is a much different approach from just critiquing the bible and the reflections of someone immersing themselves in it and seeking guidance and help from a panel of faith practitioners laid the basis for some very helpful observations and experiences.
True we can be blind to poor practice and it can be helpful to have an outsider point that out but it is also most helpful if that person considers themselves part of the solution and wants to stay and help rather than point the finger and run…
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
1.03 pm on 12 Nov 2009
I remember you telling me about that book. From what you told me it shows us that a rating system is a poor way to understand a church and religion. I must read that book!
Reply to this comment
Comment by Paul
8.16 am on 16 Nov 2009
I’ll lend you my copy
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jeremy Hitt
6.17 pm on 11 Nov 2009
I like to think of myself as progressive, but the idea of church rating seems to rub me the wrong way – mainly for the reasons you list, but also it seems to marginalize what church should be focused on. How many points(?) would a church receive if it had bad parking, but sound theology in Christ? What if the speakers hummed due to a grounding problem or something but had very faithful members within the community who took care of elderly shut-ins, etc. Those types of things are hard to gauge. What if the pastor counseled someone at 3am in the morning who was ready to take their own life, where does that get calculated into the mix? The things that go unannounced in the bulletin are more of the foundation of a church than where the super awesome Super Bowl party is going to be held.
Although, since the church was sort-of established to rep. Christ to the nations, it is a good thing to have a mind about how the church is perceived. Again, based on your reasons above, what is important to an atheist at the time of checking out a place won’t be probably be high on the importance scale Kingdom-ly speaking…
Great article though… what do you think about this: A large church I know has hired a firm to select their next pastor. Not at all uncommon, but the “head hunters” are given a certain criteria and whomever doesn’t meet the minimum standard their resume gets canned. Is there much discernment factored into these types of selection processes? Just curious to see what you think- thanks for the post.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
1.05 pm on 12 Nov 2009
Thanks for extending my thoughts, with great questions and examples. As for the scenario of head hunters, I think that system will find the kind of pastor they are looking for, perfectly. Might not be the one they need though
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jim Henderson
8.14 pm on 13 Nov 2009
Jason
As always I am honored by your friendship and the thoughtful way you respond to difference. You are one of a handful of leaders I send people to without explanation or reservation. I will never be able to match your theological nuance or curiosity. So thank you for putting the things you and I have discussed in private in public.
I don’t typically go into this level of detail when explaining my invlovement with Church Rater but out of respect to you and your readers I will try.
1. Why Sunday Services Only? – The church has become a core part of the consumer culture. It understands itself as an instituion and has sought the approval of its host culture (I am speaking of The West but more and more The Rest of the world since we have been exporting our version of Christianity for the past 500 years). Sunday is Showtime for the church. We advertise it, we invest most of our money in it we invite people to it, we put up signs saying EVERYBODY WELCOME (really?) When a group/business/organization goes to these lengths to promote itself it is essentially saying – Come and see – which is why Church Rater stands on solid ground in its mission to critique what the church calls church. When the church decides to get in the business Jesus originally intended it to be in ie making disicples,serving those who dont belong and connecting with the people Jesus misses most – they will put Church Rater out of business. But as long as The Show remains the central identifying act of the church relative to how OUTSIDERS understand it – Church Rater is on solid ground and I would argue long overdue.
2. Consumerism – I think you have heard enough from me on this and I know we have much agreement on this point even though our tactics differ.
3. Polarisation – Why pretend. Christians in your church walk out each Sunday and over lunch “rate your church” the preaching, the singing, the kids program, the coffee (seriously) the parking etc etc. We have cultivated a community of people who expect to be served, warmed and filled. We shouldnt blame them – we’re trained them to expect this level of attention. If we want something different we will need to do something different. All Church Rater is doing is holding up a mirror on “what is”. All Church Rater is doing is “making the obvious apparent ” (thanks to Paco Underhill Retail Anthropologist for that phrase).
But more to your critique – go read our site http://www.churchrater.com
and what you will discover is that the majority of people coming to the site are self evaluating their own churches (often its pastors) and giving themselves 5 stars for being a church where “anybody will find God” or ” the best church I have ever ever ever been to”
There is actually a dearth of self reflection or honest critique. And the few who come with anger or name calling we take on directly and ask them to own their stuff (which Christinans typically run from like the anti Christ) or we straight up ban them.
This has been one of the most revealing aspects of this experiment. Church Rater simply exposes the fact that churches for the most part live in a bubbble, a silo and are largely unaware of how they are really coming across.
While you and your readers may find this dismaying -we actually get many requests to “send a rater” to a church to help them see themselves through the eyes of Ouotsiders – We respect these churches and are seeking to find a way to respond to them
4. Why an Athiest? – This is the easiest one to answer. Read Luke 16 and see what Jesus says about the Unjust Steward. I know this passage is rarely preached due to Jesus forgetting to add a moralizing analogy at the end or I should say the wrong moralizing analogy. But he essentially says – Outsiders know more about how the world really works than Insiders do – so emaulate them – not the behaviors but their thinking. I wanted an Athiest because I knew they would be bare knuckled with us. I wanted an Atheist becuase they would err on the side of providing a ruthless analysis. I wanted and Atheist because they would not be bound by a belief system that by our own admition largely blinds us from seeing reality as it is (thus the missional movement impulse among Cs to redefine what is and isnt important. And finally I hired an Athiest becuase I knew that I would not be able to get The Church’s or Christians attention if I simply told them I was taking an unbeliever,lost person or outsider to church – They would and do ignore me when I take that approach.
Let me add that like Jason I would like for Casper and everyone to follow Jesus – Casper would not be surprised to hear me say that. He is nto a professional Athiest, he a a person who happens to be an Atheist (right now) just like you and I are people who happen to followers of Jesus (right now – people drop out of our movement too)
Church Rater is not affilliated with Off The Map. It is a business I have started independently with Casper, A Jewish Lawyer, A Duke Divinity Student with a strong assist from Helen my ex fundamentalist – now almost but not quiet Athiest colleague. Working with this team is an honor and to a person they have been at least as honorable as the best group of Christians I have ever had the pleasure of working with. I truly believe (although at least two of them don’t) that Jesus brought us together to start Church Rater to help the Church more clearly see itself through the eyes of Outsiders and provide the millions of people who are “church shopping ” (at last count over 100,000 per month in Texas go online) find a church that fits
As you can see I am completely unrepentant but I remain humbled and grateful for the love and leadership Jason exhibits as a follower of Jesus. I appreciate the opportunity to express myself and apologize for any “over the top” language. I hope you are able to hear the spirit of my communication and please forgive the many typos
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
9.29 am on 14 Nov 2009
Hi Jim, thanks for taking the time to write a considered and long reply. I remain completely unconvinced, and am still your greatest fan
Reply to this comment
Comment by David
10.19 am on 16 Nov 2009
“We have cultivated a community of people who expect to be served, warmed and filled. We shouldnt blame them – we’re trained them to expect this level of attention. If we want something different we will need to do something different.”
– Spot on. Perhaps ChurchRater will play its role as one of a number of catalysts to start bringing about the changes required.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jeremy Hitt
8.46 pm on 13 Nov 2009
@Jim Henderson – I’m glad to see your side and the “what” for Church Rater. Can I ask you, “why” Church Rater? I don’t mean that as a slight against you but what does Church Rater accomplish?
Here’s my thinking (as if it matters or anyone cares) if Church Rater is a mirror making the obvious apparent (great line btw), does church rater PROP up the way things are? Does that make sense? You say in your post that the church isn’t doing what Christ intended – generally speaking – and I would generally agree as well. So does Church Rater provide a platform for churches to be better at not being what Christ intended. Again, does that make sense?
I’m just curious… and in my original comment I expressed that this type of thing rubs me the wrong way. I am a bit of a fundamentalist, I hope in a good sense, but at the same time the church has vastly grown away from it’s mission. I don’t want to jump on the church bashing wagon, but church should be an expression of Christianity and I fear it’s become the opposite… making church the “object” and Christ the “peripheral”. Are we responsible for it remaining in its unintended state?
Thanks, Jim, for your post.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Matt Casper
9.26 pm on 13 Nov 2009
I thank you, too, Jason, for rating the raters…!
I hear where you’re coming from, and it’s definitely a thoughtful place. I think it may also be an “inside” place.
So much of what happens at a church is insider in nature–if you don’t know, then you won’t know. But the task assigned by Jesus (I think, anyway) is to serve outsiders.
So Sundays are the days when everyone knows a church’s front doors won’t be locked to outsiders; that’s why we think one Sunday visit is absolutely enough to provide “rating criteria.”
Consumerism… well, I know most every American church has embraced the marketing and self-promotional aspects of consumerism, but they are unwilling (and perhaps innocently) to embrace the flipside: e.g., the standard “truth in advertising” kind of standards other public-facing organizations must work with. Think of ChurchRater as a Better Business Bureau for churches.
Polarisation… or as we Yanks spell it, “polarization”
I think this is the nature of any belief system–you believe or you don’t–so it would make sense that polarisation flows down to each sect, each church, each person. But we’re providing a place for people who love AND hate a church to POLITELY discuss why. To share one’s opinion is to take a stand, and when you take a stand not everyone stands with you.
Why an atheist…? Good question. It could be taken–and often is–as kind of like asking a deaf person to offer a critique of “Rubber Soul.” But Jesus apparently wanted you all–his followers–to reach folks like me.
And what business wouldn’t want unfiltered feedback from its target market…? Rather, what church devoted to saving lost souls would pass on the chance to dialog with a lost soul?
My two (or perhaps 10) cents, and I look forward to hearing more from you…
Matt Casper
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
9.37 am on 14 Nov 2009
Hi Casper, thanks too for taking the time to jump in. I was just with Steve Lewis, he was here in London, and he was telling me what a great guy you are. I hope our paths cross one day.
One thing you wrote, ‘what business wouldn’t want unfiltered feedback from its target market…?’.
That’s the rub for me, the Church isn’t a business with target markets, or shouldn’t be. I know I don’t want to conceive of the Body of Christ that way ever. And I wonder if your feedback is far from ‘unfiltered’, you’re a ‘professional atheist’ making a living from churches paying you to rate them, and the interviews with consumer media around that branding.
I wonder if the irony isn’t in you unmasking the consumer nature of church, but in the nature of your rating process and set up, that is just as captive to the logic of the market?
Warmly, Jase
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jim Henderson
1.33 am on 14 Nov 2009
Jeremy
I care about what you have to say
Your question good one and I think gets to at least one of Jasons concerns.
First of all Church Rater will never acquire the kind of influence that will cause people to become comsumers- the sad fact is that the church is capable of doing that all on its own. Until the issue of the assumption of professional clergy is challenged consumer chrisitianity will continue to flourish. (BTW please note the work assumption – I am not saying no one should ever be paid I am saying most pastors would be better off copying the example of the African American church where many pastors have day jobs (like musicians and artists)
Now to your question – it is all a matter of tactics. Some ( like Jason) attack consumerism from within and from the front – using the bible and theology as their weapons. My view is that this approach wont win. Jason and I will disagree and he might be right but at my age ( 62) I dont have time to make another bet so I prefer the approach of Sun Tzu.
He said “when you are near you make them think you are far away” I use irony to subvert rather than a frontal assault. Much of Church Rater is simply the use of irony. Our Master and founder of our movement – Jesus, used irony often when preseting parables – he told people he would not explain himself to them and if they had eyes to see they would “get it”
While i profoundly disagree with consumer christianity I will not spend anytime explaining my position to people who just want to argue. Instead I will provide a platform where the church does that work for me. Providing a rating system for the practice already employed by ordinary Christians all over the world simply gives them a way to demonstrate their committment to the practice.
If churches dont like it then I suggest they redesign themselves and challenge people to become a church for the sake of others instead of themselves
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
9.40 am on 14 Nov 2009
Hi Jim,
I appreciate your location of me from ‘within and the front’. My primary location is within a church community, that’s the hope of the church in consumerism, at least for me.
The theology and bible are for our social imaginations of that community, instead of consumer imaginings, at least that’s what we are trying to practice.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Randy Siever
4.30 am on 14 Nov 2009
Wow. I hadn’t been on the churchrater site since it got re-done. Cool. I don’t personally care much for the whole rating thing, but it seems essentially the same as rating a movie or a restaurant to me. You can’t really tell anything about the movie or the restaurant by reviews, but it might make you want to go experience them yourself…particularly if you are bored or hungry.
What’s really interesting about the site is the opportunity that it presents to see the various forms of church through others eyes…including at least one really bright and thoughtful (and funny) atheist. Matt Casper would obviously use a different criteria than most Christians would use, and he’ll be quite intolerant of fluff, but it would seem to be a really good idea to listen to someone who we might see things from a very different view than our own. And someone, like Matt, who will challenge some of the lame and poorly thought through excuses we have for the “show” in “the building” (a phrase I use now a days for “church”, since the real church is what’s left when the building burns down).
Anyway, I’m not sure this site is worth all the fuss. I might not be getting the point, either, but it’s more like edutainment than anything else.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jim Henderson
3.42 pm on 14 Nov 2009
“The theology and bible are for our social imaginations of that community, instead of consumer imaginings, at least that’s what we are trying to practice.”
I like this frame – “our social imaginations of the community”
I also want the church to remimagine itself as a place for the sake of others.
I want the church to understand itself differently – to have a different social imagination
I am committed to that goal as well
I also want the church and frankly Jesus to be understood by Outsiders in the same way
I dont this issue is any more complicated than thne fact that we are taking two different tacks to attempt to move the team in the right direction.
for me Church Rater is one of several tacks I take with that goal in mind
But I may be being too generous in assessing my own motives
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
10.35 am on 15 Nov 2009
Hi mate. This next question from me is very personal, yet it is one that is close to my heart in trying to understand some of what you are doing. Forgive me if I ask it ineptly.
How does your personal church location connect to how and why you want the church to change as you have stated above? I’d say an amen to all the above, but wonder at the location of your church life, with regards to that change in church?
Is it change in church for others, but not for you? I’m honestly trying to understand a location and church life that you are in, yet critiquing a church that is in a different location that you are?
In essence if you don’t inhabit a church community like the one you aspire to, do you loose integrity and the ability to change the church, you are not part of?
Does that question make any sense mate?
Jase
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jim Henderson
5.12 pm on 15 Nov 2009
Jason
it is a good and a fair question and interestingly enough one that Barb (my wife for those who dont know her) and I were talking about this morning when we were sitting togther starting the day.
What Jason is referring to per my “location as it relates to church” is that I officially stopped attending Sunday morning church services about 10 years ago. I state it that way not to be a “smart ass” but to state clearly the way I see my change in location.
Why I stopped is not the issue- the fact I stopped is the issue.Meaning many many people “attend church” appearing to “belong” but have no real deep connection to the community. I know this because I pastored for 25 years so it becomes unavoidably real when you see these people show up or not show up every week.
However – the fact that they continue to show up essentially “gives them a pass” meaning “we see them as part of the community “. While this may be generous, kind, loving and Jesus like (for some) I actually wonder if our providing a place to “appear to belong while not actually belonging” reinforces their lack of hert connection to the mission of Jesus. I understand that I am taking a cynical angle on this but its one any pastor will understand (and have long talks with about in the back room)
So on a personal level I have to say that there is absoulutely nothing I miss or feel an absence of by not “belonging” to a Sunday Morning meeting. I go when I am invited to speak or when a friend is speaking or if they need me to be there for some other purpose. When I go I am supportive. For example I went to church last week in New York to the River Vineyard because my daughter wanted me to check it out while we were visiting. I want her to go to church because it meets a need in her life and I encouraged her to attend – I thought it was a good church – I told her that she needed to find a place to serve and lead or else she would probabaly lose interest and stop going. Thats how we’re raised our kids. All that to say that I can separate my experience from others who from my experience do want to go to church and do get something out of it.
So to Jasons kinidly stated but pointed question – given my lack of comittment to the Sunday Morning Church service ritual – what gives me the moral authority to critique it?
On one hand nothing gives me the authority. On the other 25 years of pastoring and 35 years of attending give me all the authority I need.
You need to know that it is my personal mission in life to “rescue Jesus from religion and take him public”. That mission puts the church in my crosshairs. The church’s primary face to the world is the Sunday Morning Ritual.The church lives and dies by that paerception because they created it.I think that is a gross misrepresentation and in fact an insult to the gospel of Jesus. Like David Bosch I agree that Jesus “never intended for his movement to become a religion”
Listen, Church Rater may or may not ever be seen by a larger audience- That is completely in the hands of Jesus. Some of you can pray he stops it and others that he blesses it. Whatever floats your boat. It is only one of the many approaches I intend to use to help nudge the church toward what Jesus intended it to be – a church for the sake of others.
I hope churches like Jasons and numerous other churches I encourage eventually put Church Rater out of business
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jason Clark
12.19 pm on 16 Nov 2009
Hi Jim,
Thanks again for taking the time to be open an respond in detail.
Jase
Reply to this comment
Comment by James Prescott
10.01 am on 16 Nov 2009
This is an interesting debate, and I think even just the act of having it can be constructive to the church, so in that sense whether I agree or disagree with Jim Henderson is irrelivant.
Church is more than a Sunday service – which should be a ‘come as you are’ place in practice, not just theory (and our church is pretty good at that)and many people’s first encounter with church isn’t through the Sunday service at all, and it shouldn’t be if the church is doing its job properly (for want of a better phrase). For example in our community our church engages with projects such as providing food for local people in need, free present wrapping at Christmas, helping people renovate their gardens and helping with cleaning up rivers. In all of these projects we are engaging with many unchurched people who will know we are Christians – and that will be their first experience of church.
So to ‘rate’ churches like some sort of customer survey from our consumer cutlture is a very dangerous thing to do.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Colin
1.33 pm on 16 Nov 2009
Guys – thanks for the helpful debate.
Really appreciate the way you are bringing both sides.
From my side, I do find the mentality of rating my own church with the hope of recruiting people stomach churning.
However I know that a lot of churches are living in the tension of wanting to change but not knowing how, and if Jim can help that – then that is a good thing.
I completely agree with Jason in that Sundays are hopefully becoming lower down the priority list, and the lives that are touched during the rest of the week, are what is more important.
Knowing that – it is hard to justify the massive debate and effort on making Sundays better, they are what they are, a gathering of a family of all ages, that continually is changing and growing and shrinking, and that hopefully lives outside of the service are being touched somehow.
Like Jason, I want folks like Casper to find the life Jesus has to offer, and would rather he came to something other than a Sunday service, and hopefully encounter a group of people seeking to live under a different values system.
But if we can find ways to make our services more helpful, in a way that is not divisive – that would be good too!
Cheers guys
Colin
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jim Henderson
4.08 pm on 16 Nov 2009
Thanks Jason for the dialogue (this wasn’t a debate)
Debates seek to win
Dialogue seeks to understand
I am quite aware that there are thousands of churches like Jasons and the one James mentions. These are the kinds of churches that I love and want other people to know about . The reality is that for most of the public these churces are invisible. They continue to see the church exactly the way I descrbed it.
One of things Church Rater will do is platform the stories of churches we love/like/respect or admire. We will leverage our visibility to provide awareness of what the church (in our opinion) should look like. On this point all of us at church rater are in agreement.
One final point – Church Rater laregely exists to provide a platform for people to commnent on their experience with any given church – meaning none of us at Church Rater will be the main voice – it wont be our opinions. It will be the opinons of the very people churches want to be attending thier churches. Which seems to me to be a perfect place to interact with prospective attendees.
If the pastors of the churches that are being criticized respond with grace and authenticity their critics will notice and by their example of humility they will stand out.
This process is inevitable- Doctors, Lawyers, Professors all tried to block or scare people away from rating them (BTW these are the professions most pastors like to be associated with) but in the end they actually began welcoming the ratings since it only served to provide new forms of conversation with people who in the past just went away saying nothing
Just a thought and thanks again
http://www.churchrater.com
Reply to this comment
Comment by James Prescott
7.44 pm on 16 Nov 2009
Jim: I go to Jason’s church, so the church I was talking about and Jason’s church are in fact one and the same!
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jim Henderson
7.51 pm on 16 Nov 2009
makes sense
thanks
Reply to this comment
Comment by Michael Byrne
6.51 am on 30 Jan 2010
I know I’m late to this post… but… I just stumbled onto churchrater and found it very interesting. Further digging brought me to this dialogue. I just want to add a couple of my own responses to this discussion.
1) I think there is a tendency to talk about church attendees as as if they are mindless, unaware drones. People can read and discern. I don’t think anyone needs to worry about protecting them from unfair church ratings.
2) Church attendees are sharing these perspectives anyway. And they tell their friends and they tell their friends, etc. But church leaders usually don’t get to hear any of it.
Go churchrater. I’m in full support of your efforts.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jim Henderson
4.17 pm on 1 Feb 2010
Michael
Thanks for the ecouragement. ChurchRater has receieved almost 30 requests from pastors to send someone to rate their church. The churches range from 8000 to 50 people in size.
We realize that many people do not see us in a negative light (chruch haters) but see us as an organization that can help them.
It continues to be one of the more interesting projects I’ve worked on
Reply to this comment
Comment by Jim Henderson
4.16 pm on 1 Feb 2010
Michael
Thanks for the ecouragement. ChurchRater has receieved almost 30 requests from pastors to send someone to rate their church. The churches range from 8000 to 50 people in size.
We relize that many people do not see us in a negative light (chruch haters) but see us as an organization that can help them.
It continues to be one of the more interesting projects I’ve worked on
Reply to this comment
Comment by pam hogeweide
11.03 pm on 19 Feb 2010
Nice, diplomatic and thoughtful piece, Jason. I quoted you in my own review about Church Rater. I hope my readers will take time to read your entire post. You have articulated it well, the same concerns I have that cause me to hesitate to fully endorse Church Rater. But I know Jim, like you, and have benefited from his wisdom and insight many times. Maybe I will eventually come around to rally the message he is trying to get out through CR, but until then, I respect the man, and respect his efforts, just not sure about the vehicle he’s driving with this CR thing.
All the best!
http://godmessedmeup.blogspot.com/2010/02/church-raters-is-it-yelp-meets-yahweh.html
Reply to this comment