One of the more surprising lessons I've learned from working with churches is this:
When a church genuinely commits to becoming healthier, conflict often gets worse before it gets better.

That sounds backwards.
Shouldn't healthier churches experience less conflict?

Eventually, yes.
But not at first.

The reason is simple. Healthy change exposes unhealthy realities. Things that have been ignored for years suddenly become impossible to ignore. Hidden tensions come into the light. Long-standing assumptions are questioned. Informal power structures begin to shift. Expectations become clearer. Accountability increases. The mission becomes sharper.

And whenever that happens, people respond.
Some respond with enthusiasm.
Others respond with uncertainty.
Still others respond with resistance.

I've seen it repeatedly in churches of all types and contexts. In many cases, increased conflict wasn't evidence the church was moving in the wrong direction. It was evidence they had finally started addressing the issues that had quietly been holding them back for years.

The conflict wasn't new.
It had simply become visible.

The Bible Describes This Pattern
This isn't just something organizational consultants observe. Scripture shows it happening over and over again.

Think about Nehemiah.

• Everyone agreed Jerusalem's walls were broken.
• Everyone wanted the city to be restored.
• But once rebuilding actually started, opposition came from every direction.
• Sanballat ridiculed the work.
• Tobiah threatened the workers.
• Internal complaints surfaced.
• Economic injustice was uncovered.
• Leadership was questioned.

The rebuilding didn't create those problems.
It revealed them.

Healthy change has a way of exposing unhealthy systems.

Acts 6 gives us another example.
The early church was growing rapidly. That's exactly what everyone wanted.

But growth exposed weaknesses in how ministry was being organized. Widows were being overlooked. Complaints began spreading through the congregation.

The apostles didn't dismiss the concerns as people simply "being difficult."
Nor did they allow conflict to derail the mission.

Instead, they strengthened both the spiritual and organizational health of the church by appointing qualified leaders to meet the need.

• The result wasn't less ministry.
• The result was more ministry.

"And the word of God continued to increase, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly..." (Acts 6:7)

Notice the pattern.

• Growth.
• Conflict.
• Healthy organizational response.
• Greater kingdom impact.

Churches Are Spiritual Bodies......but they are also organizations.
Sometimes we act as though acknowledging organizational realities somehow minimizes the work of the Holy Spirit.
It doesn't.

• The Holy Spirit inspired Paul to give qualifications for leaders.
• The Holy Spirit guided the apostles to organize ministry in Acts 6.
• The Holy Spirit is not opposed to healthy systems.

In fact, healthy systems often become the channels through which healthy ministry flourishes.

One of the best observations I've encountered in organizational research is that organizations naturally drift toward equilibrium. Every church develops habits, routines, communication patterns, decision-making processes, and informal cultures. Over time those become "the way we've always done things."

The problem is that not every system is healthy.

• Some systems quietly reward dysfunction.
• Some avoid difficult conversations.
• Some create confusion.
• Some unintentionally discourage mission.

When leaders begin bringing clarity, healthier structures, stronger communication, and renewed mission, they disrupt the existing system. Evidence-based organizational diagnosis emphasizes that lasting change requires addressing underlying causes—not merely treating visible symptoms—and that this process often creates resistance before healthier patterns emerge.

That shouldn't surprise us.
People generally don't resist change because they hate health.
They resist change because change feels like loss.

Don't Misdiagnose the Conflict
One mistake I see churches make is assuming that conflict automatically means something has gone wrong.

• Sometimes that's true.
• Sometimes conflict is sinful.
• Sometimes it reflects pride, selfish ambition, or a refusal to submit to Christ.
• But sometimes conflict simply means unhealthy assumptions are finally being challenged.

Those are very different diagnoses.
One of the most helpful principles in organizational diagnosis is this:

Symptoms are not the diagnosis.
Conflict is a symptom.
The question isn't whether conflict exists.
The real question is:

Why does it exist?
Is it because leaders are acting foolishly?
Or is it because unhealthy systems are finally being addressed?

That's an important distinction. Churches often rush to solve visible problems without asking what deeper issues produced them in the first place. Good diagnosis always precedes good treatment.

Healthy Churches Don't Avoid ConflictThey handle it differently.
Healthy churches tell the truth.

They refuse hallway conversations.

• They don't allow gossip to replace communication.
• They don't confuse unity with silence.
• They learn to disagree without becoming disagreeable.
• They hold one another accountable while extending grace.

Most importantly, they keep returning to the mission Christ has given His church.

That doesn't eliminate conflict.
But it changes what conflict accomplishes.

Instead of tearing the church apart, it becomes one of the tools God uses to mature His people.

A Word to Pastors and Church Leaders
If you're leading your church toward greater health and you've noticed conflict increasing, don't panic too quickly.

• Step back.
• Pray.
• Listen carefully.
• Distinguish between symptoms and causes.

Ask whether the resistance you're experiencing is actually revealing issues that have existed for years beneath the surface.

Healthy leadership doesn't create every conflict.
More often than not, healthy leadership simply exposes what unhealthy systems have been hiding.

• Keep leading with humility.
• Keep speaking truth with grace.
• Keep your eyes on the mission.
• And remember this:

Sometimes the very resistance you're experiencing is evidence that the church is finally beginning to move.
After all, dead things rarely resist change.
Living things do.

What We Need To Know
The Pawleys Island Community Church scandal is now both a local crisis and a denominational test. The legal process will determine the facts and responsibility in this case. Leaders should not speculate beyond what has been reported or alleged.

But Southern Baptist leaders do not need to wait for every legal question to be resolved before speaking clearly about what churches owe children, parents, survivors, and their communities.
The key issue is not whether every SBC church is unsafe. They are not. The key issue is not whether the national SBC controls local churches. It does not. The key issue is whether Southern Baptist leaders at every level will use their influence to build a common culture of protection.

This moment calls for more than institutional distancing. It calls for national, state, associational, and local leaders to say the same basic truth: one case of abuse is one too many, and careless disregard for legal, moral, and common-sense protections must stop.

What SBC Leaders Can And Should Say
National SBC leaders should speak with moral clarity. They should say that abuse prevention is not a distraction from the Great Commission; it is part of faithful witness. They should affirm due process while refusing minimization. They should say plainly that no ministry leader has the right to conceal known risks from parents, ignore reporting duties, or place institutional reputation above child safety.

State convention leaders should speak pastorally and practically. They can remind churches that autonomy carries responsibility. Local churches make their own decisions, but they should never make those decisions in isolation, secrecy, or negligence. State leaders can urge immediate policy reviews, training, and cooperation with law enforcement whenever abuse is suspected.

Associational leaders should speak locally and relationally. They often know pastors, churches, and ministry patterns more closely than national or state leaders. They can say, “We are here to help you prepare before a crisis.” They can also say, “If an allegation arises, do not handle this alone, do not investigate it internally first, and do not delay reporting.”

Local church leaders should speak directly to their own congregations. Pastors, elders, deacons, school boards, and ministry directors should tell parents and volunteers what safeguards are in place, how concerns can be reported, and how the church will respond if a concern involves a leader. Silence creates anxiety. Clarity builds trust.
The message at every level should be firm but careful: not every allegation is automatically true, not every church is guilty, and not every leader has failed. But every allegation deserves seriousness, every child deserves protection, every survivor deserves compassion, and every accused person deserves due process.

What SBC Leaders Can And Should Do
National leaders can set expectations without controlling churches. They can promote a baseline culture of protection across SBC life: written child-safety policies, screening, training, supervision, mandatory reporting, survivor care, and cooperation with civil authorities. They can keep prevention visible from the platform, in entity communications, at annual meetings, in seminary training, and through ongoing resources such as abuse prevention initiatives.
National leaders can also correct the narrative. When influential voices imply there is no abuse crisis because a particular investigation ended without charges, national leaders should say that legal outcomes matter, but they do not exhaust the church’s moral responsibility. Absence of institutional prosecution is not the same as absence of harm, failure, or needed reform.

State conventions can provide practical infrastructure. They can offer policy templates, vetted training options, consultation, crisis-response guidance, recommended reporting procedures, and lists of qualified counselors and legal resources. They can encourage every cooperating church to conduct an annual child-safety review.
Associations can make this work personal and repeatable. They can host training for pastors, staff, elders, deacons, children’s workers, youth leaders, and school administrators. They can help churches rehearse the first twenty-four hours after an allegation: who reports, who contacts legal counsel, who communicates with parents, who cooperates with law enforcement, and who cares for affected families.

Local churches can implement the safeguards. That means written applications, reference checks, background checks, sex-offender registry checks, prior church or ministry history, waiting periods for new volunteers, two-adult supervision, classroom visibility, check-in/check-out procedures, mandatory reporting training, clear documentation, and annual retraining.

Local churches should also remove private exceptions. No longtime member, generous donor, pastor’s friend, staff spouse, beloved volunteer, or “repentant” offender should be exempt from child-safety rules. Grace does not require access. Forgiveness does not remove consequences. Dignity does not override protection.

Where the Greatest Opportunity Exists
The greatest opportunity is for SBC leaders to stop treating abuse prevention as a specialized issue and start treating it as normal church health. 

• A healthy church protects children.
• A healthy church tells the truth.
• A healthy church reports suspected abuse.
• A healthy church cooperates with authorities.
• A healthy church cares for survivors.
• A healthy church does not hide behind polity, reputation, or good intentions.

This is also an opportunity to strengthen trust in cooperation. Southern Baptist polity does not allow national control of local churches, but cooperation can still shape expectations. National leaders can speak. State leaders can equip. Associations can train. Local churches can act.

The path forward is not denial, exaggeration, or institutional self-defense. It is humble, coordinated leadership at every level.

The Pawleys Island case should call Southern Baptists to a better posture: careful with facts, compassionate toward victims, fair toward the accused, serious about law enforcement, honest about failures, and relentless in protecting the vulnerable.

Sources: The Roys Report, The Christian Post, The Baptist Courier/SCBaptist statement, WPDE/WCIV, and child-protection guidance for ministry environments. Child-safety policies should be reviewed with qualified legal counsel in each state.

In my first article I focused on toxic leadership cultures—how they form, how they remain protected and what churches must do to recover.

This article is for the people caught in the fire.

The staff member who stayed too long.

The ministry leader who finally left.
​
The spouse who watched the person they love slowly disappear under the weight of conflict, fear and exhaustion.

• Some of you are still there.
• Some of you have already left.
• Some of you do not know what to do.
• Some of you have not only left a ministry position—you have left the church entirely.

Let me begin here: What happened to you matters. The harm should not be minimized because it happened inside a church. The spiritual language surrounding it does not make it less real.
You do not have to call dysfunction “ministry hardship.”

You do not have to excuse sin because the person responsible was under pressure.
And you do not have to make an immediate decision about your future while you are still trying to understand what happened.

Recovery begins with truth.

SOME OF YOU MAY NEED TO LEAVE

There are times when staying is neither wise nor faithful.
The harm is too deep.
The culture is too entrenched.

The leadership is unwilling to change.
The accountability structures are not real.

In situations like these, leaving is not necessarily quitting.
It may be the clearest act of stewardship available to you.

You may need to protect your marriage, your children and your own spiritual, emotional and physical health.

Toxic ministry cultures often distort your sense of responsibility. You begin to believe the church cannot survive without you. You feel guilty for considering departure. You may be told that leaving will hurt the congregation or damage the mission.

But faithfulness is not measured by how much mistreatment you can absorb.
There is no spiritual virtue in allowing yourself or your family to be continually damaged by leaders who refuse correction.

Sometimes leaving is not a failure of courage.

Sometimes it is courage.

SOME OF YOU NEED TO STEP AWAY FROM MINISTRY

​Leaving one church does not require you to immediately join another staff.

• You may need months.
• You may need years.
• You may need time to recover your identity apart from your position.

Ministry can become so consuming that we stop knowing who we are when the title is removed.

• You were introduced by your role.
• Your relationships came through your role.
• Your schedule revolved around your role.

Then the role ended, perhaps suddenly and painfully, and you were left wondering who you are now.
You are still a person made in the image of God.

You are still loved by God.
Your usefulness to the church is not the basis of God’s affection for you.

You are allowed to rest.
You are allowed to get a job outside vocational ministry.

You are allowed to sit in the back of the room.
You are allowed to attend church without being responsible for the church.

A season away from ministry may not be a detour from God’s work in your life.
It may be part of it.

SOME MAY NEVER RETURN TO VOCATIONAL MINISTRY

Some who have been deeply harmed will never return to paid church ministry. I’m not stating that as a directive-simply a description. It is the choice of some.

We should not shame them.
We should not treat them as spiritual casualties who failed to persevere.

A person can love Jesus, serve faithfully, bless the church and live a deeply fruitful life without ever again receiving a paycheck from a congregation.

Some former staff members may find new work in education, counseling, business, nonprofit leadership, trades or another field entirely.

They may still serve quietly in a healthy church.

We must stop acting as though returning to the same kind of position is the only acceptable ending.
Sometimes redemption means returning.
Sometimes redemption means rebuilding somewhere else.

SOME OF YOU SHOULD STAY

Not everyone needs to leave.

There are moments when staying may be the right decision.

• Perhaps there is genuine repentance.
• Perhaps unhealthy leaders have been removed.
• Perhaps new accountability is being established.
• Perhaps the church is honestly confronting what happened.

Some wounded staff members may play an important role in helping a church heal. They know where the systems failed. They understand where communication broke down. They may become trusted voices during the rebuilding process.

There is something deeply meaningful about seeing a wounded church become healthy.
Some people heal best by watching something broken become restored.

But staying must not be romanticized.
You are not required to sacrifice yourself to prove that redemption is possible.

The fact that a church could change does not mean you must remain there to help it change.
You are not the savior of that congregation.

Jesus is.

Stay only if staying is wise, supported and grounded in real change—not merely promises of change.

WHEN YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT TO DO

Some of you are hoping for a simple answer.
There may not be one.

There are times when both staying and leaving involve significant loss.
That is why you need wise help.

Find people who are not controlled by the institution.
Find people who will not automatically defend the pastor, the board or the church.

You may need:

• A trusted pastor outside the situation.
• A counselor familiar with spiritual abuse.
• A mature Christian mentor.
• A physician, if stress has affected your health.
• An attorney, if threats, contracts or financial matters are involved.
• A small group of wise friends who know you and will tell you the truth.

You need help making a God-informed decision.

• Not a fear-informed decision.
• Not a guilt-informed decision.
• Not a decision dictated by the people who created the crisis.

You may not know what to do right away.

That is okay.

Uncertainty is not unfaithfulness.

Take time.
Pray.
Seek counsel.
Listen to your spouse.
Consider your children.

Pay attention to what remaining in the environment is doing to your soul.
Then make the wisest decision you can with the information you have.

TO THE CHURCH REFUGEE

Some of you have already left.
You did not transfer neatly to another congregation.

You disappeared.
You stopped attending.
You stopped answering calls.
You are not simply a former member.
You are a church refugee.

You left because the place that was supposed to be safe was no longer safe.
You trusted leaders who failed you.
You watched leaders close ranks.
You watched the truth get managed.

You watched those who spoke honestly become the problem.
Now you cannot imagine walking into another church building.
You do not trust the person behind the pulpit.
You assume every warm welcome hides an eventual demand.
You expect betrayal before the relationship even begins.

I understand why.

Do not rush.

Do not allow anyone to shame you back into church attendance before you are ready.

You may need counseling.
You may need to attend anonymously.
You may need to sit near the door.
You may need to leave early.
You may need to observe for months before trusting anyone.

That is not weakness.
It may be wisdom.

But I also want to speak firmly.

• Do not give up on the church.
• Do not give up on God.

The church that hurt you is not the whole church.

The pastor who failed you is not the Chief Shepherd.
The leaders who manipulated Scripture do not own Scripture.

They do not have the authority to separate you permanently from the body of Christ.
Jesus is not threatened by your questions.

He is not asking you to pretend.
And he is not like the leader who hurt you.

Read the Gospels again. Watch how Jesus treated wounded, overlooked and burdened people.

• He was gentle with the bruised.
• He confronted hypocritical leaders.
• He did not crush wounded people.
• He drew near to them.

Do not confuse Jesus with those who used his name carelessly.

TRUST IS ALWAYS REBUILT SLOWLY

You do not owe immediate trust to a new church or leader.

Trust should be earned through character, consistency, humility and time.

• A healthy church will understand that.
• A healthy pastor will not demand unquestioning loyalty.
• A healthy leader will not become defensive when you ask questions.

Pay attention to how a church handles disagreement.
Pay attention to whether leaders can admit mistakes.
Pay attention to whether authority is concentrated in one personality.
Pay attention to whether questions are welcomed or punished.

You are not looking for a perfect church.
There is no such church.
You are looking for a church where sin is taken seriously, repentance is practiced and accountability is real.

FORGIVENESS IS NOT THE SAME AS RETURNING

You may eventually forgive the people who hurt you.
That does not require you to return to the same church.

It does not require restored access.
It does not mean the harm was small.

Forgiveness, reconciliation and trust are not the same thing.
Forgiveness releases personal vengeance to God.

Reconciliation requires truth, repentance and changed behavior.
Trust requires evidence over time.

You may forgive someone and still decide that contact is unwise.
Do not let anyone weaponize forgiveness to pressure you back into an unsafe situation.

DO NOT HEAL ALONE

Wounded ministry leaders often isolate.

• They are tired of explaining.
• They are embarrassed.
• They are uncertain whom they can trust.

But isolation can allow the wound to deepen.

Find safe people.
Not curious people.
Not people looking for gossip.

Find people who can listen without defending the institution.
People who can challenge you without dismissing you.
People who can help you separate what happened from who you are.

You may need professional counseling.
That is not evidence of spiritual failure.

Get the help you need.

YOUR STORY IS NOT OVER

You may feel as though everything has been lost.

• Your position.
• Your friendships.
• Your reputation.
• Your confidence.
• Your sense of calling.

Some losses may never be fully recovered.
That should not be minimized.

But loss is not the same as the end.

God can work in the aftermath.

• He can restore what was damaged.
• He can rebuild what was broken.
• He can help you serve again, perhaps in a different way.
• He can help you follow Jesus without surrendering your discernment.

Healing does not mean forgetting.
Healing means the wound no longer controls every decision.
Healing means you can establish boundaries without hatred.
Healing means the people who hurt you no longer possess the final word over your life.

AFTER THE FIRE

Some of you will leave.
Some of you will stay.
Some of you will step away from ministry.
Some of you will return.
Some of you will serve in entirely new ways.
Some of you will need a long time before you know what comes next.

There is no single recovery timeline.
But there is hope.
The fire may have changed you.

It may have ended a season you thought would last for decades.
It may have taken more from you than others will ever understand.

But it does not have to destroy your faith.
It does not have to define your future.

Take the time you need.
Tell the truth.

Get wise help.
Protect your family.

Leave if you must.
Stay if you should.

Rest if you need to.
But do not surrender your soul to the people who wounded it.

Do not let a toxic leader have the final word.
Do not let an unhealthy church become your definition of the church.
​
And do not give up on the God who sees, knows, heals and restores.
There is life after the fire.


​

It happened again. A major staffing change - a Senior leader stepped down, followed by a cryptic public statement.

No moral failure
No disqualifying sin
A written statement - we wish the best for all involved

Nothing to see here - the congregation is told. 
Except the smoke rising in the background.

I ran across this story a few weeks back, saw some commentary on Facebook and read the weeks later unfolding story. 

This quote smelled familiar. “Personnel turnover is the smoke. The leadership style is the fire.”

I’m not writing with any one Pastor or church in mind, but let the reader understand, I’m writing from personal experience as a staff member and a denominational consultant with several churches in mind.

Their Pastors
The Staff
Their Board or Elder or Deacons or Committees

This will be hard.

THERE ARE NO PERFECT CHURCHES

This goes without saying. (My Freshman English Teacher would say - then why say it?) 

Here’s why. 

Some of you may read the following with offense.You are or may be a Pastor, or a staff member or a lay leader. What follows might sting. Some of it should, you probably know it’s true-you’ve thought it during the moments when you can’t sleep or are trying to justify in your mind-to later justify to others why another staff member, board member or other church leader decided to leave, resign or is otherwise getting off the “bus.” Some of what follows, especially the parts that don’t apply to you, should roll off your back. 

Every church leadership structure will be impacted by our sin and imperfection. Let’s get one thing straight.

We’re all sinners. This is an undisputable biblical fact. Romans 3:23

But, we forget it. And we forget this. 

Our sin, small, mild, big, strong, excused or hidden or running loose like a wild fire has an impact on our church, its leadership structures, our colleagues and congregations. 
With that in view - let’s get honest. 

WHEN LEADERS SIN - THE IMPACT IS FELT

“When the righteous thrive, the people rejoice; when the wicked rule, the people groan.” Proverbs 29:2

Every leader, and those who serve with them has a first day. And then, sometime after that first day the leaders and the staff together - have “one of those” days. 

A day in which realities become clear. The imperfections and the failures of one or both, harshness, lack of character, duplicitiness, incompetence, manipulation, unrighteous anger, just about anything that makes you think - hiring this person or taking this role might have been a big mistake. 

I remember in one ministry stop “my day”  involved cursing and an almost physical altercation in a crowded local restaurant. 

I felt sick, I wanted to throw up. I’d just moved my family to a new ministry setting, this wasn’t gonna be good.

I met a man, a former staff member, who, on his first day in his new role, was commanded to go into the office of another staff member and fire them. He said that was the day he started looking for a new job. He left six months later.

THE QUESTION TO ASK - IS THIS A PATTERN OR IS IT A ONE OFF? 

We shouldn’t be held prisoner for having a bad day. We all have them.

But, here me out.

If the actions/reactions on that one day are disqualifying - you should absolutely be held accountable. If illegal, immoral or unbiblical, likely fired.

If you have a consistent pattern of having those kinds of days, and no one is able to hold you accountable, if  those days are excused away because of the pressure that you’re under or if you get a pass for unbiblical and unchristlike behavior from those who should hold you accountable - you’re not getting what you deserve. 

Please note: what I’m speaking about here is not a single day. 

But, observable behaviors, over time, which reveal consistent patterns consistent with your character, how you perform and how you treat others.

A SURE SIGN OF SMOKE

If the organization has had a lot of churn and burn, if it has a high turnover rate, if every departure is the departing staff member’s fault, if they are spoken of negatively after they’ve left ... .publically and privately…

And….

The immediate supervisor: Be it a Senior Leader, Team Leader or department Head along with the Board always seem to stay in place and take no participatory responsibility in the churn.

It’s definitely a pattern.

Constant reorganizations, new hiring practices, new upper and middle management with short tenures all betray this reality: 

This organization, business or church is likely toxic. 

If they say they are just the victim of “bad hiring” how many times can that excuse be employed? They are either are incompetentent or toxic.

THE LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY TO PROTECT THE PERSON, BRAND OR ORGANIZATION

If a church or organization is built on the cult of personality, platform skills or notoriety of the public person, if its durability is tied to their executing their craft, accountability will be difficult. 

Why? 

That key person is seen as the engine, the glue, the product or commodity. 
The fear-if that staff member, that key leader disappears everything ends.

Faith in God to build his church - by the power of the Holy Spirit, through the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus - absent.

Perhaps that’s why some of these churches fall like a house of cards when the key person falls. 

What is built on man always falls - because God doesn’t share his Glory. 

Back to the accountability part. 

A leader like this often flies at an altitude that rises above concerns and is not subject to regular or real accountability. Perhaps out of fear, sometimes it's because the leader has manipulated the system.

Toxic leaders are experts at sniffing out and creating “blind loyalty” among those who orbit them. 

They trade favors, access, positions and attention to gain sure footing and shun real accountability. Then they position those paid for such loyalty in places where they will protect them and their behavior and performance from scrutiny.

One leader I’m familiar with surrounded himself with others who formed a shield insulating him from real evaluation and legitimate critique. He spiritualized his position and role adding an extra layer of protection - his guardians learned to say; “only God can hold him accountable.”

IN A SYSTEM LIKE THIS - CLASHES ARE  IS INEVITABLE, CRASHES ARE CERTAIN 

Be it the leader or the church, one day it will all come crashing down. 

Here’s why.

The inner circle is always in flux. Sooner or later people start to wake up. The once devoted become disillusioned, they “defect” by asking real questions. They are met with sharp resistance, if they persist they are ousted, blackballed, reorged and removed. 

An ever changing inner circle will eventually grow weak - the sharpest leaders will leave the church, what remains is a group with less history, competency and capacity. 

The Leader grows confident, complacent and cocky. In this season, they will eventually make a mistake, a fatal one, leading to their fall. 

Another potential scenario is the leader finally being held to account. The accountability group, be it a committee, a Board, Elders, Deacons or eventually the Congregation has enough. 

If it’s one of the former smaller groups they’ve likely been having conversations, interviews with those hurt by the leader and the system and they’ve been working behind the scenes to remedy what’s broken so that health and vitality can be achieved. 

When it's the congregation holding a toxic leader accountable the hurt and harm will break out like wildfire.

And after a structure is burned - it often crashes.

THE RECOVERY — WHAT MAKES IT HARD, WHAT MAKES IT POSSIBLE

Recovery begins with honesty.

• Not image management.
• Not carefully worded announcements.
• Not another staff restructuring.
• Not quietly moving the problem somewhere else.

Honesty.

​A church cannot recover from what it refuses to name. If leaders have sinned, the sin must be acknowledged. If people have been mistreated, their experiences must be heard. If a pattern has developed, it must be evaluated as a pattern—not dismissed as a collection of unrelated misunderstandings, personality conflicts or unfortunate departures.

This is where recovery often stalls.

The leaders responsible for addressing the problem are sometimes the same leaders who ignored it, enabled it or benefited from it. They may have protected the leader, defended the system or participated in keeping the congregation in the dark.

They may now be asked to evaluate decisions in which they were deeply invested. That is difficult.

It may require them to admit:

• We should have seen this sooner.
• We believed the wrong people.
• We dismissed legitimate concerns.
• We prioritized reputation over truth.
• We protected a leader rather than the people entrusted to our care.
• We allowed loyalty to become more important than accountability.
• We told the congregation less than it deserved to know.

​Those admissions are costly—but necessary.

There can be no real recovery without a true evaluation of everyone in leadership.
Not only the senior leader. Not only the person whose resignation made the news. The board, elders, deacons, personnel committee, executive staff and others who held meaningful responsibility must also be evaluated.

What did they know?
When did they know it?
What did they do?
What did they fail to do?

Did they ask hard questions?
Did they investigate concerns?
Did they silence or discredit those who raised them?
Did they confuse protecting the church with protecting the leader?
Did they participate in severance agreements, confidentiality demands or carefully constructed public statements that kept the congregation from understanding what had actually happened?

These are not pleasant questions.
But without them, the church may remove one person while leaving the entire enabling system intact.
And if the system remains, the problem will return.
It may return with a different leader, a different title and a different set of victims—but it will return.

THE SYSTEM MUST BE EXAMINED

Toxic cultures are rarely created by one person alone.
A destructive leader may be the fire, but systems provide the fuel and oxygen.

Recovery requires evaluating the processes that allowed misconduct, manipulation, incompetence or abusive leadership to continue unchecked.

That evaluation should include:

• How complaints are received.
• Who investigates concerns.
• Who has authority to discipline or remove a leader.

• Whether staff members can speak honestly without fear of retaliation.
• Whether performance reviews are real or merely procedural.
• Whether governing leaders receive unfiltered information.
• Whether the senior leader controls who serves on the bodies responsible for accountability.
• Whether departures are consistently explained in ways that protect the organization while damaging the person leaving.
• Whether nondisclosure agreements or financial settlements have been used to purchase silence.
• Whether the congregation is given meaningful information or only carefully managed statements.

• A system in which the senior leader selects the people who evaluate him is not a healthy accountability system.
• A system in which every concern must pass through the person being questioned is not accountability.
• A system in which board members only hear the leader’s version of events is not oversight.
• A system in which staff members know that speaking honestly may cost them their jobs is not safe.
• A system in which congregants are repeatedly told, “Trust your leaders,” while leaders refuse to provide truthful answers is not biblical trust.

It is control.

THE CONGREGATION MUST BE TOLD THE TRUTH

There are legitimate limits to what can be shared publicly.

Personnel matters require wisdom. Victims deserve privacy. Legal counsel may properly advise restraint. Not every detail belongs in a congregational meeting or public statement. But confidentiality must not become concealment.

There is a difference between protecting private information and deliberately keeping a congregation in the dark.
Church members do not need every detail, but they do need the truth.

They need to know whether there was misconduct.
They need to know whether a pattern existed.
They need to know whether leaders failed to act.
They need to know what has changed.
They need to know how future concerns will be handled.
They need to know that the church values truth more than institutional reputation.

Cryptic statements create suspicion because people can smell smoke.
They see the sudden resignations.

• They notice the constant staff turnover.
• They hear fragments of stories.
• They watch respected leaders disappear.
• They recognize that every departure is explained with the same vague language.

Then they are told there is nothing to see.

That approach does not protect trust.
It destroys it.
Trust is not rebuilt by asking people to stop asking questions.
Trust is rebuilt by leaders giving honest answers.

THOSE WHO WERE HURT MUST BE HEARD

A church cannot recover while continuing to marginalize the people who experienced the harm.
Former staff members should be contacted. Departed leaders should be interviewed.
Those who raised concerns should be heard again—this time without defensiveness.

Patterns often become visible only when multiple stories are placed beside one another.
What was previously dismissed as one disgruntled employee may be revealed as a repeated pattern.

• The same angry outburst.
• The same manipulation.
• The same private threat.
• The same public shaming.
• The same retaliation.
• The same character assassination after departure.
• The same board members explaining it away.
• The same statement assuring the congregation that everything is fine.

Listening does not mean accepting every allegation without examination.
Claims must be tested.
Facts must be verified.

People can misremember, exaggerate or misunderstand.
But dismissing every negative account as bitterness is not discernment.
It is avoidance.

Healthy leaders do not fear honest evaluation.
They welcome it because they care more about truth and holiness than reputation and position.

REPENTANCE MUST BE SPECIFIC

Churches often use the language of grace to avoid the work of repentance.

• We are told:
• We are all sinners.
• No one is perfect.
• We need to forgive.
• We should move forward.

All of those statements can be true—and all of them can be misused.

Biblical repentance is not vague.

• It names the sin.
• It accepts responsibility.
• It acknowledges the harm.
• It seeks forgiveness.
• It makes restitution where possible.
• It changes behavior.
• It accepts consequences.

A leader who says, “Mistakes were made,” has not necessarily repented.
A board that says, “We could have communicated better,” may be minimizing a far deeper failure.
A church that asks wounded people to forgive while refusing to tell the truth is demanding reconciliation without repentance.

That is not grace.
It is spiritual manipulation.

Forgiveness does not eliminate accountability.
Grace does not make leadership qualifications optional.

Restoration to fellowship does not automatically mean restoration to office.

A leader may be forgiven and still be disqualified from leadership.
A leader may repent and still need to resign.
A board member may be sincere and still need to step down because he repeatedly failed in his responsibility to protect the church.

Consequences are not the enemy of grace.
Sometimes consequences are the means by which grace produces genuine change.

SOME LEADERS WILL NEED TO LEAVE

This is one of the hardest realities of recovery.
Sometimes removing the senior leader is not enough.

Those who enabled, concealed or repeatedly excused the behavior may also need to leave their positions.
This does not mean every person who missed something must be removed.

Leadership requires discernment.

• There is a difference between someone who was deceived and someone who deliberately looked away.
• There is a difference between someone who lacked information and someone who suppressed it.
• There is a difference between someone who made a poor judgment and someone who repeatedly protected a destructive leader.

But when governing leaders have lost the trust of the congregation, refuse honest evaluation or remain committed to the old system, their continued presence may prevent recovery.

The church must be willing to ask whether those who led it into dysfunction are capable of leading it into health.
Sometimes they are.
Often they are not.

A title does not create the right to remain in leadership.
Neither longevity, loyalty, generosity nor friendship exempts someone from accountability.

INDEPENDENT HELP MAY BE NECESSARY

Churches in crisis often believe they can fix themselves.
Sometimes they can.
Often they cannot.

The relational history is too complicated.
The alliances are too strong.
The fear is too great.
The facts are too contested.
The leaders are too invested.
Outside help may be necessary.
​
A qualified denominational leader, church consultant, investigator, attorney, counselor or conflict specialist can bring perspective that insiders lack.

The key word is independent.

An outside advisor who is personally loyal to the leader, financially dependent on the church or committed to protecting the institution may only reinforce the problem.

The church needs people willing to ask hard questions, follow the evidence and tell the truth—even when the truth is costly.

This may involve:

• An independent review of leadership conduct.
• Confidential interviews with current and former staff.
• A governance review.
• A financial audit.
• A review of severance agreements and nondisclosure practices.
• A clear process for receiving allegations.
• A biblical and organizational assessment of leadership qualifications.
• A written recovery plan with measurable actions and public reporting.

Outside help is not an admission that the church has failed beyond repair.
It is an admission that humility is necessary.

RECOVERY TAKES LONGER THAN PEOPLE WANT

A toxic culture can be created over years.
It will not be repaired in a few weeks.

• A new leader does not automatically create a new culture.
• A revised organizational chart does not restore trust.
• A sermon series on unity does not heal people who were mistreated.
• A congregational meeting does not erase years of secrecy.

Recovery is slow because trust is rebuilt through repeated evidence.
People need to see that concerns are now taken seriously.

Staff members need to see that speaking honestly no longer results in retaliation.
The congregation needs to see that leaders tell the truth even when it is embarrassing.
Future leaders need to be evaluated for character, not merely charisma.

Accountability structures need to function before the next crisis, not be invented during it.

The church must learn that health is not measured only by attendance, giving, baptisms, buildings, influence or online reach.

A church can be growing numerically while decaying spiritually.
It can appear successful and still be deeply unhealthy.
It can celebrate public victories while privately crushing people.
Recovery requires redefining success.

WHAT MAKES RECOVERY POSSIBLE

Recovery is possible when leaders fear God more than they fear public embarrassment.

• It is possible when truth matters more than brand protection.
• It is possible when those in authority are willing to examine themselves.
• It is possible when wounded people are heard.
• It is possible when sin is named and repentance is real.
• It is possible when disqualified leaders are removed.
• It is possible when failed systems are dismantled.
• It is possible when accountability is clear, independent and functional.
• It is possible when the congregation receives enough truth to understand what happened and what is being done.
• It is possible when leaders stop demanding trust and begin earning it.

And ultimately, recovery is possible because the church belongs to Jesus.

• Not the senior pastor.
• Not the founding family.
• Not the board.
• Not the staff.
• Not the donors.
• Not the congregation’s most influential members.

Jesus is the head of the church.
He is not threatened by the truth.
He is not honored by concealment.
He is not glorified when leaders use spiritual language to protect themselves.
He is glorified when sin is confessed, when justice is pursued, when the wounded are cared for and when his people walk in the light.

DO NOT WASTE THE FIRE

When the smoke finally clears, the temptation will be to rebuild quickly.
Get back to normal.
Hire someone new.
Restore attendance.
Reassure donors.
Quiet the critics.
Move forward.

But returning to normal may mean returning to the very culture that produced the crisis.

The goal should not be normal.
The goal should be health.

Do not waste the fire by rebuilding the same structure with different names.
Do not replace one charismatic leader with another while leaving accountability unchanged.
Do not punish those who spoke up and reward those who remained loyal to dysfunction.
Do not confuse silence with unity.
Do not confuse survival with recovery.
Do not confuse a full room with a healthy church.

The smoke was a warning.
The fire revealed what the church had refused to see.
The collapse exposed what was structurally unsound.

Now there is an opportunity to rebuild differently.
More honestly.
More humbly.
More biblically.
More carefully.

With real accountability.
With qualified leaders.

With clear processes.
With a congregation that understands what happened.
With care for those who were harmed.

And with confidence—not in a personality, platform or brand—but in Jesus Christ, who loves his church enough to expose what is hidden and graciously call his people back into the light.

.

​

This Week's Big Signal
The clearest signal this week is that renewal work is becoming more concrete and more equipping-oriented. The strongest recent examples are not flashy growth stories; they are tools, gatherings, and models aimed at helping ordinary churches build actual ministry capacity: Lifeway's discipleship micro-conference and DisciplesPath tool, NAMB's Replant Summit, the Send Network replant and renewal pathway, and Baptist Press's report on churches serving people trapped in addiction.

That matters because many churches no longer need another broad call to "get healthy." They need a trustworthy next step: a discipleship audit, a replant readiness process, a leadership-development pathway, a worship leader training environment, or a community-facing ministry that moves from compassion to Bible immersion and baptism. The week also shows a shift in tone. Revitalization is being framed less as a verdict on struggling churches and more as an invitation to honest assessment, courage, and practical obedience.

One qualifier matters. Much of this evidence comes from denominational reports, ministry platforms, and practitioner reflections. These are useful field signals, not neutral academic proof that a method will work everywhere. The durable takeaway is not "copy this event" or "adopt this model." It is that churches in renewal need measurable pathways for discipleship, leadership, worship, mission, and community engagement.

Trends for Leaders to Notice

1. Discipleship is moving from aspiration to diagnosis. Lifeway Research reported that 52% of U.S. Protestant pastors are satisfied with discipleship and spiritual formation, but only 8% strongly agree, and only 30% say their churches have specific methods for measuring discipleship. Lifeway's June 25 micro-conference drew more than 500 registrants and introduced DisciplesPath as a free assessment tool. Leaders should notice the turn from "discipleship matters" to "what exactly is happening, and how do we know?"
2. Renewal gatherings are being designed around the whole ministry team. Baptist Press reported that the SBC worship micro-conference saw worship leader attendance grow from 400 at the previous annual meeting to 1,600 in Orlando, with 150 senior pastors also registered. That is a meaningful signal for revitalization: renewal is not only a lead pastor issue. Worship, discipleship, kids, students, volunteers, and staff culture all carry the weight of congregational health.
3. Replanting language is becoming more mobilizing. NAMB's 2026 Replant Summit theme is "Every Church. Matters. Mobilized. Multiplied." The event agenda names practical breakouts such as micro-shepherding, disciple-making, residencies, raising up leaders, and fruitfulness. That combination suggests the replant conversation is widening from rescue to mobilization.
4. Community-facing ministry is being treated as discipleship, not just outreach. Baptist Press's June 26 story on Set Free churches in Arizona and California highlighted congregations engaging people in addiction through Gospel proclamation, Bible immersion, and baptism. The important signal is not simply that these churches serve hard places. It is that renewal can come through ministries that force a church to recover urgency, compassion, accountability, and disciple-making depth.
5. The social conversation around church data remains lively but uneven. Ryan Burge's recent Graphs About Religion archive shows strong engagement around debates on place, nones, megachurches, and the SBC. For pastors, the lesson is to use national data as a flashlight, not a steering wheel. The local church still has to interpret its own community, membership patterns, and missionary responsibility.

What's Overhyped
The overhyped narrative is that the next conference, tool, or assessment will solve church decline by itself. Tools are helpful when they force honesty and action. They become noise when churches collect them without changing calendars, leadership habits, member expectations, or ministry priorities.
Where the Greatest Opportunity ExistsThe greatest opportunity right now is to build renewal around clear pathways instead of vague burden. A pastor can begin by asking five plain questions: How do we know whether people are becoming disciples? Where are leaders being developed? How are we caring for weary ministry servants? Which people in our community are we actually moving toward? What is the next faithful step we can take in 30 days?
For Southern Baptist and non-denominational churches, the most actionable move is to pair spiritual honesty with practical design. Use a discipleship assessment. Train ministry leaders, not just the senior pastor. Name whether the church needs revitalization, fostering, adoption, or replanting. Build pathways for new believers and struggling people before the church asks for more growth.

Associations, state conventions, and renewal consultants can serve churches best by helping them move from shame to clarity. The right posture is pastoral invitation: tell the truth without contempt, honor the church's history without being trapped by it, and give leaders a next step small enough to begin but serious enough to matter.

The work of renewal is rarely dramatic in the moment. It is usually slow, honest, prayerful, and patient. But week by week, the churches that face reality, stay on mission, and take faithful next steps are the ones most likely to see lasting fruit.

Sources: Lifeway Research, "State of Discipleship Insights Report equips leaders for intentional disciple making"; Baptist Press, "Lifeway discipleship micro-conference equips, encourages church leaders"; Baptist Press, "Worship micro-conference attendance, enthusiasm projects bright days ahead"; Send Network, "Replant Summit"; Baptist Press, "Arizona, California churches preach freedom from addiction"; Baptist Press, "Revitalization is not a label; it is an invitation"; Graphs About Religion archive

​

Every once in a while, a public debate begins to drift so far into the world of headlines, institutions, investigations, and convention politics that we forget the people living beneath those headlines.

I fear that is happening again in the Southern Baptist Convention.

In recent days, I have heard and read respected voices suggesting there really was not a sexual abuse crisis in the SBC. The Department of Justice closed its investigation. No sexual-abuse-related charges were filed against the SBC, the Executive Committee, or SBC entities. Therefore, some have concluded that the crisis itself was exaggerated, politicized, weaponized, or even invented.

I understand why that conclusion may be attractive to some.
It is also incomplete.

Southern Baptists should be careful with our words. We should not imply criminal guilt where prosecutors did not bring charges. We should not make accusations that cannot be substantiated. We should not continue speaking as if the DOJ found something it did not find.

Truth requires that kind of honesty.
But truth requires something else as well.

The absence of federal criminal charges is not the absence of a crisis.
Those are two different questions.

The Department of Justice was asking whether federal crimes had been committed.
Southern Baptists must ask a much deeper question.

Were children, students, women, and vulnerable people harmed in churches connected to our Convention?
Were survivors sometimes ignored, dismissed, or left to carry their pain alone?
Did some churches fail to respond wisely, promptly, biblically, or legally?
Have pastors, leaders, volunteers, and trusted church figures committed abuse or misconduct?

The answer to all of the above?
Yes, without hesitation. 

Those realities do not disappear because a federal investigation concluded without charges.

The Headline:The DOJ investigation matters.

When a federal investigation closes without charges, that should be stated clearly and fairly. It is not a small thing. It matters for the SBC, the Executive Committee, those who were under investigation, and the broader public record.

No one should speak carelessly about that.
But a legal conclusion is not the same thing as a moral conclusion.

A prosecutor’s decision not to file charges does not mean every decision was wise, every survivor was treated well, every church responded faithfully, every policy was sufficient, or every leader acted with courage.

Courts answer legal questions.
Churches answer moral ones.

Our standard has never been merely, “Did we avoid criminal prosecution?”
Our standard must be, “Did we honor Christ, protect the vulnerable, tell the truth, care for the wounded, and act with integrity?”

Those are not always the same question.

The Crisis Behind the Headlines
Practically speaking, as an associational leader, I have dealt with four separate instances of abuse allegations in my first two years serving in this role.

Our association includes approximately 150 churches.

Those four situations are simply the ones I know about. Like every associational leader understands, we are not aware of every crisis that occurs in every autonomous congregation.

But I can say this with confidence: every one of those situations was a crisis—affecting victims and their families, the accused (whether allegations were substantiated or not), confirmed perpetrators facing consequences, church leaders under pressure, congregations seeking understanding, concerned parents, volunteers and staff caught in turmoil, the surrounding community, and ultimately our corporate witness.

That is the part I fear is being swept aside in the careless rhetoric that now says there is no sexual abuse crisis in the SBC.

Those making that claim may be speaking institutionally.
But those who have been directly impacted are not thinking institutionally.

They are thinking personally—about the phone call they never wanted to receive, the meeting they never imagined attending, the trust that was broken, the child who was harmed, the survivor who finally spoke, and the church that may never be the same.

Any instance of abuse is a crisis.
Those who have been directly impacted will tell you.

Two Errors We Must Avoid

The first error is exaggeration.
Not every SBC church is unsafe, not every pastor has failed, not every allegation is true, not every leader acted wrongly, and not every concern should be turned into an institutional indictment.

We must be careful, truthful, and just.

The second error is dismissal.
We must not say that because the DOJ filed no charges, there was no crisis, nor assume that because most churches have not experienced a public abuse allegation, the problem is not serious. We must also resist the idea that decentralization removes our responsibility to help churches prepare, or that institutional relief should lead to pastoral indifference.

Both errors damage our witness.
Exaggeration destroys trust.
Dismissal deepens wounds.
Southern Baptists should reject both.

The Better Question
The question before us should not be, “Was there a crisis?”
For victims, families, churches, leaders, communities, and our witness, the answer is yes.

The better question is, “What kind of people will we be now?”

• Will we become defensive?
• Will we become dismissive?
• Will we become weary of the issue?
• Will we treat prevention as a distraction from mission?
• Or will we recognize that protecting the vulnerable is part of our mission?

Jesus does not treat the wounded as interruptions.
He moves toward them.

The church should do the same.

Responsible Reform
This is where I believe Southern Baptists should place our energy.

Not in relitigating every headline.
Not in pretending the problem was invented.
Not in speaking as though every church is guilty.

But in educating, equipping, and training churches to prevent abuse and respond rightly when allegations arise.
The SBC Executive Committee’s Fortify Initiative is a good and needed step in that direction. It is designed to help associations, state conventions, and local churches strengthen abuse prevention and response. That is exactly the kind of work we need more of, not less.

Associations can play a meaningful role here.

• We can help churches think before a crisis happens.
• We can train pastors, staff, deacons, elders, ministry leaders, and volunteers.
• We can encourage every church to have written policies.
• We can help leaders understand mandatory reporting laws.
• We can teach churches how to recognize grooming behaviors.
• We can urge churches to use background checks wisely.
• We can prepare leaders to cooperate with civil authorities.
• We can help churches know what to do in the first twenty-four hours after an allegation.
• We can remind churches that caring for survivors is not optional.

We can also point churches toward good written resources, including materials such as Handling Allegations in Ministry, the SBC Abuse Prevention and Response resources, Essentials training, state convention resources, MinistrySafe, and other trusted tools that help churches move from general concern to practical readiness.
The goal is not to create fearful churches.

The goal is to create faithful, prepared, clear, and courageous churches—churches that love children enough to protect them, survivors enough to hear them, truth enough to investigate carefully, justice enough to report properly, and the gospel enough to refuse cover-ups, shortcuts, and silence.

Our Witness:This issue is not a distraction from the Great Commission.
​
It is directly connected to our witness.

• A church that preaches the gospel must also protect the vulnerable.
• A church that calls sinners to repentance must also tell the truth about sin in its own house.
• A church that sends missionaries to the nations must also be safe for children in its nursery, students in its youth ministry, and families in its pews.

The world is watching.
But more importantly, the Lord is watching.

• Every allegation deserves truth.
• Every victim deserves compassion.
• Every accused person deserves due process.
• Every church deserves wise counsel.
• Every child deserves protection.
• Every community deserves churches it can trust.
• Every Southern Baptist should want all of those things at the same time.

So yes, let us speak accurately about the DOJ investigation.

Let us not say it found what it did not find.
Let us not assign criminal guilt where charges were not brought.

But let us also refuse to say the absence of federal charges means there was no crisis.

The legal investigation may have concluded.
Our responsibility has not.

The crisis behind the headlines is not merely institutional.

• It is personal.
• It is pastoral.
• It is congregational.
• It is missional.

​And for those who have lived through it, it is very real.
Southern Baptists should be the last people to explain that away.


​

A weekly roundup of revitalization, replanting, and church renewal insights and news.

This Week's Big Signal
The clearest signal this week is that renewal leaders are being pushed beyond "come and see" ministry toward deliberate, embodied mission in the neighborhood. Baptist Press published Todd Gray's June 29 argument that every church already has a "come and see" strategy but many need a "go and tell" strategy, including door-to-door evangelism where it fits the context. NAMB's annual meeting report carried the same basic conviction from the denominational side: five consecutive years of rising Southern Baptist baptisms did not happen by accident, but because churches made evangelism a priority and equipped people to live on mission.

That matters because this signal is not just about evangelistic technique. It is about what churches count as health. Karl Vaters' June 30 ChurchLeaders piece warned against treating fuller rooms as the win, and Gary Moritz's June 16 reflection on 70 years of church growth pressed the sharper question: are churches making disciples or attenders who need churches to keep producing for them? The Unstuck Group's July 1 case study of City Church in Fort Wayne adds a live example: rapid growth can be healthy when groups, serving, baptisms, and leadership engagement keep pace with attendance.

One qualifier matters. Several of these sources are practitioner commentary or case examples, not broad representative studies. City Church's story is not a plug-and-play model, and door-to-door evangelism will not work equally in every setting. Still, the convergence is useful: renewal is not nostalgia for full sanctuaries. It is the recovery of sent people who can share the Gospel, disciple new believers, and love the actual neighbors around them.

Trends for Leaders to Notice

1. Evangelism is being reframed as ordinary obedience, not a campaign. NAMB reported 263,075 Southern Baptist baptisms in 2025, the fifth straight year of increases, and Tim Dowdy emphasized that churches need people "living on mission every day." Todd Gray's Baptist Press piece makes the local version concrete: going to people still creates Gospel conversations and can train newer believers through hands-on ministry. Leaders should notice the shift from event-based evangelism to repeatable member practice.
2. "Come and see" ministry is being challenged by "go and tell" urgency. Gray's article does not dismiss gathered worship, but it does name the imbalance: every church has a way to invite people in, but fewer have a trained pathway for going out. For revitalization teams, the practical question is not whether every church should adopt the same method. It is whether the church has any intentional, repeatable way to initiate Gospel conversations beyond its property.
3. The critique of attendance-centered church growth is getting sharper. Vaters argues that a full room is not the final proof of revival, and Moritz argues that decades of church growth practice often produced consumers more efficiently than disciple-makers. This is not anti-growth. It is a warning that attendance without deployment can leave a church busy, funded, and still missionally thin.
4. Healthy rapid growth requires faster discipleship, not just faster systems. The Unstuck Group's July 1 episode reports that City Church in Fort Wayne has seen 51 percent year-over-year growth and growth in groups, serve teams, discipleship, and baptisms. Pastor Chris Freeman also described the hard side: many new believers lack basic biblical formation, requiring practical classes for young men and women. Leaders should notice that the discipling load rises when evangelism bears fruit.
5. Community events are becoming mission-field bridges when they fit the local context. Biblical Recorder's June 30 report on MacArthur Blvd. Baptist Church's World Cup watch party in Irving, Texas, shows a church using a global sports moment to welcome neighbors in one of the nation's most diverse areas. The important piece was not the event itself but the church's intentional follow-up, hospitality, and stated desire to connect people with Christ-centered fellowship.

What's Overhyped
The overhyped narrative is that renewal can be measured mainly by whether attendance is rising again. Rising attendance may be a gift, but it can also hide weak discipleship, thin evangelism habits, or an inward-facing culture. The better question is whether the church is sending more faithful witnesses into ordinary life.

Where the Greatest Opportunity Exists
The greatest opportunity right now is to rebuild churches around sentness: members who know the Gospel, can speak it naturally, serve neighbors credibly, and help new believers mature quickly. For pastors, that means auditing the church's actual missionary habits, not just its calendar. Where are members already in contact with unchurched neighbors? Who is training them? What happens after someone professes faith? Who teaches brand-new believers how to read Scripture, pray, resist temptation, and join the mission?

For Southern Baptist and non-denominational churches, this is a practical second-half-of-2026 opportunity. Pair outreach with formation. If the church hosts a community event, build follow-up before the event begins. If members go door-to-door, train them not only to speak but also to listen, pray, and disciple. If baptisms increase, assume the church will need a more robust pathway for new believers, not just a better celebration Sunday.

Associations, networks, and renewal consultants can help churches by moving the conversation from "How do we get more people to come?" to "How do we equip our people to go, tell, serve, and disciple?" That question works for a small rural church, a neighborhood replant, a suburban church with attendance momentum, or a multiethnic congregation in a fast-changing city. The methods will differ. The missionary posture should not.

The work of renewal is rarely dramatic in the moment. It is usually slow, honest, prayerful, and patient. But week by week, the churches that face reality, stay on mission, and take faithful next steps are the ones most likely to see lasting fruit.

Sources

• Baptist Press, "Consider going to them" (https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/bptoolbox/consider-going-to-them/)
• Baptist Press, "NAMB presentation to messengers highlights love for missionaries, evangelism resources" (https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/namb-presentation-to-messengers-highlights-love-for-missionaries-evangelism-resources/)
• ChurchLeaders, Karl Vaters, "Jesus Never Told Us To Fill Church Buildings" (https://churchleaders.com/pastors/pastor-how-to/175601-karl-vaters-never-told-us-to-fill-church-buildings.html)
• ChurchLeaders, Gary J. Moritz, "How Did We Get Here? Where 70 Years of Church Growth Took Us" (https://churchleaders.com/voices/exchange/2218926-how-did-we-get-here-disciples.html)
• The Unstuck Group, "How to Navigate Rapid Church Growth: Interview with Chris Freeman from City Church - Episode 455" (https://theunstuckgroup.com/interview-with-chris-freeman-episode-455/)
• Biblical Recorder, "World Cup watch party scores goal for church and community" (https://www.brnow.org/news/world-cup-watch-party-scores-goal-for-church-and-community/)