From Outcomes to Marks
Yesterday during lunch, my friend Joel and I started discussing church "success." What would success look like for Missio Dei? As much as I reject church-growth principles, I found it very difficult to articulate success in non-quantitative ways. The American way of doing church has been thoroughly infused with pragmatism. Most of you who read this blog would agree with this assessment, and would agree that we need to move away from quantitative methods for determining "success" to something more qualitative. One problem with quantitative methods is that is doesn’t take context into consideration (any urban teacher who must raise standardized testing scores in order to keep his/her job will resonate with this reality). Every context has unique challenges. A Somali church should be evaluated differently than a suburban white church.
What method should we employ? Why evaluate the health of a church at all? Well, it is good to know what is healthy within a church system and what is not, so that it may move to health. I suggest we take a page out of church history and return to the language of "marks"–what are the "marks" of a successful church?
I’d like to hear some of your suggestions…but let me get the list started:
- Characterized by generosity and self sacrifice.
- Practices hospitality.
- Moving beyond homogeneity to diversity in age, class, race, gender, ethnicity, etc. in a way that reflects context.
- Proclaims the Gospel.
Any more suggestions? Let’s banter about what should–or should not–be included in evaluating the health and success of a church.









Add a little Jesus Manifesto badge to your site. Spread the love! You can do so by adding the following code to your sidebar: