Questions from the
FUTURE
A framework for building Churches that remain beneficial.
She is from the future.
You are not.
Let's go!
You're at your computer, trying to figure out what your church should be up to. Suddenly you get a Zoom reminder for a meeting that is happening right now.
I'm late!
You don't remember having a meeting scheduled for this time, so as you log in and check your teeth in the preview video, you try to figure out what this is about.
As the meeting host lets you in, you see a 30(ish) year old woman you seem to recognize, but can't place. She introduces herself: Janae: Hi! Thanks for logging in. I know this is odd, but I'm Janae. You know me as the 10 year old girl that walks by your church on my way to school in the morning. Look...I'm calling from the future. I have some questions I wish I'd known to ask when I was younger.
For the sake of this presentation, lets just ignore the implications of time travel and future Zoom tech.
Continue
You: Ummm...OK. Are you sure this has to be a meeting? Couldn't it be an email from the future? Janae: You're such a Millenial. You: Fair.
Janae: Do you know this quote from Adam Grant's Hidden Potential? “It’s more important to be good ancestors than dutiful descendants. Too many people spend their lives being custodians of the past instead of stewards of the future. We worry about making our parents proud when we should be focused on making our children proud. The responsibility of each generation is not to please our predecessors—it’s to improve conditions for our successors.”
You: I've had that book on my reading list for like 4 years. I might even have it in my audiobook library...so, no.
[We can be done with the charade of a future Zoom meeting, but here's the thing: We have to figure out how to be good ancestors for future churches, now. Welcome to a presentation on the future, how to think about it, and how to adapt to it to serve the people in it.]
END OF INTRO
Continue
What would Janae ask?
We will lay out a framework for thinking about the future in a moment, but first, where can we apply it?
Janae walks by each day; that's all she knows of your ministry. So the things we'll analyze will be what she could see.
PROGRAMS, BUILDINGS, & PEOPLE
Why those?
Marshall McLuhan
"The medium is the message." This phrase, coined by futurist Marshall McLuhan in the 1960s, was his way of reflecting on the impact of television on future society. This reflection led him to predict, with startling accuracy, the internet, social media, and the present dysfunction of both. Our question is this: How did he do it? How was McLuhan able to have such an accurate analysis of the future? McLuhan believed that it is not just what we do but (mostly) how we do it that has impact.
PROGRAMS, BUILDINGS, & PEOPLEare a large portion of how we do it. They are the media,so what messages are we sending with them?
and...
Continue
The Love-is-sacred Framework
The framework uses three filters designed to help churches evaluate the extent to which they keep love as the only sacred thing. Like a multi-layered air filtration system, each filter removes that which is unnecessary, ensuring that what remains genuinely serves people and fosters the unconditional love of God among people.
HEAR MORE...
3. LEVEL UP?
1.HOLD UP?
2.GROUND UP?
One Example:
The Church in Acts 15
In Acts 15, we see the early church confront a practice and apply the filters. The Situation: As Christianity spread, more and more non-Jewish people were believing. A group of Jewish believers were insisting that new converts should be circumcised. The Hold Up: Peter, Paul, James, and other church leaders knew that this would be a problem for many. Requiring converts to adopt specific practices to find belonging in God's kingdom would be an obstacle. Wisely, in addressing this, James said these words: “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God." Acts 15:19 The Ground Up: The apostles had some new tools to employ as they addressed this. For one, Peter had been given a vision (back in Acts 10) that the laws regarding "cleanliness" no longer applied. Culture had changed! As a result, they proposed a very light set of rules intended to do one thing: foster loving relationships. The recommendations they make in their letter (Acts 15:29) exist to make it so that Gentile Christians wouldn't be unclean in the eyes of Jewish Christians (who were still observing Jewish laws) and could get together and be a community. The Level Up: This adjustment worked well for a version of Christianity that was still, in large part, Jewish, but would continue to diversify. Over time, the obstacle of circumcision (mostly) disappeared, and the church has continually referred to Acts 15 when considering how to connect with unique cultures and people groups. The move away from cultural homogeneity made leveling up in the future easier.
Continue
Using the Framework
This resource is meant to be your way of "picking the brain" of the future, getting a chance to explore at the pace and in the direction you find interesting and beneficial. From here forward, then, it's a bit of a choose your own adventure. You can...
Return to the framework/filters:
FRAMEWORK
Explore the how we do it topics:
PROGRAMS
BUILDINGS
PEOPLE
Dig a little deeper:
QUESTIONS
RESOURCES
BACK
Programs
There are many programs churches run that can be talked about, but let's focus on the big one: Sunday services. If we accept McLuhan’s premise that the medium is the message, then the way most churches structure their weekly gathering is sending an outdated message. The Sunday service, as it currently exists, was shaped by an era of scarcity of information and physical necessity—neither of which define the present nor future. Gathering dozens or hundreds of people into a room for a one-way communication experience is an artifact of a bygone media landscape. Let’s break this down by key shifts:
Could we help people experience love better by finding a primary mode of ministry that is more flexible, relational, and participatory without requiring everyone to be in the same room at the same time?
Shifts toward asynchronous and flexilocal.
Could we help people experience love better by engaging them in diverse art forms, co-creative experiences, and by giving them intentional space to absorb meaning in multi-sensory media?
Shifts toward co-creative, multi-modal uses of art.
In a post-scarcity of information age, the sermon-centric model is outmoded. Could we serve people better by curating and designing more easily accessible, engaging spiritual experiences, resources, and interactive journeys?
Shifts in the distribution and reception of information.
Could we help people experience love better by focusing on leading them into deep, trusting relationships with others, teaching them to avoid tribalism, and evaluating maturation in terms of vulnerability and belonging?
Shifts in the purpose and management of community.
BACK
BACK
Buildings
It isn't necessary or mandatory, but it is common and can be useful for ministry to have a facility. If we accept McLuhan’s premise that the medium is the message, then the way we setup, use, and share our spaces lets our members and community know what we want for them. A church building no longer needs to be the first or primary place people experience a spiritual community. They'll engage online first, relationally second, and physically last. If a church does invest in property, let it be as an act of service - not for members alone but as a resource for the entire community. Let’s break this down by key shifts:
Could we help people experience love better by using facilities as places to activate people to serve other people, instead of coming and expecting to be served?
Shifts when it comes to "who is served" by our buildings.
Could we help people experience love better by designing spaces where dialogue, expression, and vulnerable participation with others and the Word are a higher priority than one-way communication and passive attendance?
Shifts from the goal of proclamation to participation.
Could we help people experience love better by seeking to actively and personally engage with them (whether in a digital or physical space) so that they know the goal of this organization, always, is to care for them?
Shifts in the prioritizaton of digital and physical spaces.
Could we help people experience love better by creating third spaces designed for relationship development instead of trying to maximize attendance?
Shifts in the desired result of people occupying the same space.
BACK
BACK
People
By people, we mean all the people involved in the ministry - the staff and those to whom they minister. If we accept McLuhan’s premise that the medium is the message, then the way we structure leadership, relationships, and responsibility is itself forming people’s view of love, authority, and community. If the church is serious about preparing people for a future shaped by interconnection, complexity, and isolation, then we must shape ministry systems that form people for interdependence, agency, and belonging. Let’s break this down by key shifts:
Could we help people experience love better by shifting from authority to vulnerable trust, where belonging comes before belief and transformation comes through invitation?
Shifts in the way people perceive authority and roles.
Could we help people experience love better by rethinking the ways we confer and share responsibility?
Shifts in equipping and entrusting ministerial acts.
Could we help people experience love better by being the ones who carry the Word and sacraments into their daily lives and spaces?
Shifts in the accessibility and frequency of sacraments.
Could we help people experience love better if we utilize access to specialists, specialize our ministerium, and generalize the skill of people and group coordination?
Shifts in counseling and pastoral expertise.
BACK
Continue
Further Resources
SatisfiedDigital Worship Module
Rethinking PreachingArticle
Pastor as CuratorArticle
Stop Wasting ArtPresentation
The Coming Revolution in Church Economics Book
Unreasonable Hospitality Book
Tampa Underground Church Network Toolkit
The Art of Gathering Book
Reimagining Church Buildings Article
...or just reread the book of Acts with some friends!
Continue
Lead for the
FUTURE
You don't drive by looking only at the rearview mirror. Don't lead that way, either!
She says thanks for caring.
SHARE THIS!
Index
Future Zoom
Programs, Buildings, People
The Framework
Choose Your Own Adventure
Programs
Buildings
People
Questions
Resources
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Flexible, relational spaces would be more adaptable to cultural and techonological changes. By making spaces less dependent on single uses, spaces are able to evolve with changing needs. Organic community could still thrive as programmatic adjustments are made. Most importantly, people might find the church facility to be a true "third space" for them, developing a greater sense of ownership and desire to share the space with others.
What's the hold up?
Attending a weekly event is increasingly difficult for people, and it isn't just "laziness" or "lack of commitment." People are used to and expect to experience information and interpersonal connection instantly and anywhere. We live much more networked and decentralized existences than our ancestors, and our descendants will likely do the same.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
I'm aware that this particular point can be challenging for a Lutheran audience. It has been challenging to me as I've thought and begun to experiment with it. That being said, if relationships are the goal, and if we're trusting people to care for eachother, we can empower them with these tools. Giving your people permission to baptize converts and commune with one another is exciting and helps them treasure these effective tools that God has given us.
What's the hold up?
There is no more "holy-of-holies," but sometimes it seems like there is. Even if people have general access to scripture, there is still a common sense that it is "better" when they can look at it with a trained expert.Moreover, the sacraments remain enshrined in sanctuaries, and people have less access to communion than they could have. People are also afraid (or do not feel) they have permission to baptize others and, therefore, do not seek out the opportunity.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Technology and new tools have relatively little impact on the sacraments. The elements are the elements, we can't transmit them via DMs. Since we live in a flexilocal world with on-demand expectations, it's worth considering ways to deliver or empowering people to engage in the sacraments whenever it is beneficial.
What's the hold up?
There is a spirit of faithfulness in the desire to dedicate spaces and ministry tools exclusively to the proclamation of the Gospel, but this is a confusing and limiting practice. People end up developing a feeling that dedicated sanctuary spaces are somehow more holy than other spaces. This holiness can make people feel like they do not belong in such spaces, and that there is a difference between the way we interact with God's Word in one space vs. another.
What's the hold up?
Most church buildings are designed for passive gatherings: sanctuaries focus on seating capacity, lobbies are transition zones, and people have limited and controlled access to most spaces. This sends the message that the point of coming is to follow the prescribed path - that the building's true function is efficiency and programming, not facilitating connection and developing strong community.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Though the limitations of a dedicated space are obvious (and well-intentioned,) flexible use space is, by nature, more adaptable. Giving people a variety of experiences in a space will help them consider the ways that they and those they love can grow closer to God and one another. They'll seek to make special moments in that space in the future.We've already moved from standing room only to sitting in pews, and from pews to chairs. Giving ourselves space to continue to learn how people interact and grow will give us long term benefit.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Visual art used to be expensive and difficult to achieve. This is no longer the case (relatively speaking - though we aren't used to budgeting for it.) The need for live-led, corporately sung music can be a tremendous burden on small and mid-size congregations, but we seem to feel almost required to have it. Why such a focus on this when we have access to massive archives of video, poetry, images, and could easily have a WELS run library of rentable art pieces? (Especially in WI...)
What's the hold up?
Art is limited to a few primary uses in most weekend worship experiences: graphic design, lighting/decor, and corporately sung music. This works for some, but increasingly few. Corporate singing is less and less common in people's lives and very much connected to emotional experience (not didactic). Pinterest and Instagram have raised people's aesthetic expectations. Most significantly, if music is the primary art form in a worship setting, the visual learner is left behind.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
In the same way that our primary method of communicating with friends and loved ones is no longer travelling to them, but instead using technology to connect with them, a church facility would be at best a secondary way to connect people and be a community. Church property becomes an "IRL landing page" instead of the main place to engage with each other.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Whether a network of small groups, an intentionalized rhythm of personal and corporate growth opportunities, or some other method of making sure that each person your church serves has a trusted group of people they care for and rely on, find ways to integrate easy, usable tools that foster connection. Make connection first, content second. Love, informed by the love of Christ, will make the difference.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Since buildings are no longer essential for distributing information, we can help people see a building as a helpful avenue for them as they contribute to the lives of others through vocation (not just by volunteering to help with "church" duties.) A building can be a training ground at which people can find ways to care for the neglected and advocate for justice.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
By shifting church buildings from information distribution centers to activation training hubs, we create a future-ready model that expands people's capacity, not dependency. Activation hubs prioritize participation, skill-building, and application so that people leave more empowered than they arrived. As cultural and technological landscapes evolve, a church that trains and mobilizes its people can seamlessly transition into new methods, mediums, and models of ministry.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Gate-opening leadership makes congregations more resilient and adaptable by opening up the conversation to a wider variety of voices.This version of leadership is a little messier and more experimental, but trust and comaraderie grows as congregations take steps and leaps together. Culture like that can adapt to almost any environment.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Decentralized information empowers the people and ruins the gate-keepers. The good news is that control has never been the goal nor a meaningful tool in God's kingdom. "Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all.” Mark 9:35We can develop a bottom-up, servant leadership approach that thrives on mutual trust and gate-opening instead of gate-keeping.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
With a wider variety of furniture types, easy tools for dividing large spaces into smaller, more intimate ones, and a stronger focus on hospitality, we could develop ways to mix the reception of a message with interaction. We could eliminate urgency and, instead of hosting events, host get-togethers in which people are guided toward developing trusting, safe connections.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Your primary competition is no longer other denominations and congregations, the realities of a work-week, or the availability of a teacher.Now, we compete for people's attention. We compete with Netflix, the NFL, doom-scrolling, and the golden age of interactive digital content. How would you invest time and money to compete in that arena?
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
An integrated, hybrid digital-and-physical environment will look different from every community, and that's OK! Seeing each aspect of the environment as a tool to be modified is a much more adaptable approach than becoming accustomed to a specific space used a specific way and struggling to adjust later. In other words: move the furniture around today, and get your website and your building working seamlessly together.
What's the hold up?
Because people have access to more teachers, opinions, and "hot takes" than ever before, they are more resistant to centralized, position-conferred authority. As such, their trust must be earned. Unfortunately, common mindsets around the relationship between ministers and those to whom they minister demand a level of trust before relationship and acquiescence before belonging.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
It may feel like integrating a wider variety of art forms and artistic means of communication will feel strange and off-putting. This is the result of existing in a program that isn't adaptable - it's hard to level up. Unfortunately, "We just couldn't get away with that right now..." is another way to say, "We're going to fall further behind." Rethinking the weekend gathering's necessity and priority will open ministry up to a variety of exciting uses for art that will serve an increasingly diverse audience.
What's the hold up?
Long-form, single-take delivery of information has been shown to be a poor method of educating adults. If people are going to sit and listen they want to listen to experts who are fantastic at delivery (which is a gift not all share, and that's OK!) and people are open and willing to do this via a screen instead of in-person. The time and energy required to prepare and deliver a new sermon each week does not have the return on investment that it once did, and it doesn't serve the educational needs of the audience.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
When the temple curtain tore, God himself led the way in rebuilding our understanding of his place in our lives. What can we do to help people know God has come to be with them in every moment in a world in which meaning is developed through experience, not passive observation. When our spaces invite people to freely interact with God and one another in two-way communication, they'll carry those interactions with them everywhere.
What's the hold up?
Church buildings can offer rest and education, but when that’s all they provide, people approach them as consumers rather than empowered participants. If a space exists only for consumption, it becomes non-essential. People can find that same fulfillment elsewhere. When church buildings sit vacant 80% of the time and appear designed primarily for “insiders,” outsiders see no reason to step inside. A space that doesn’t activate people with purpose or belonging will always feel irrelevant to those on the outside.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Certainly, the ways that people consume media will change. Yesterday's encyclopedia is today's Wikipedia and tomorrow's Neuralink. However, an archive of material, digitally accessible and remixable, is much easier to "level up" for future applications than thousands of live events that have passed and are irretrievable. More importantly, we'll be ready (and therefore quicker) to pivot in the future, because it won't feel like we are starting from scratch.
What's the hold up?
Churches with buildings still tend to overvalue physical spaces while consistently undervaluing the ministry that can be done in digital spaces. People in those spaces then feel like the "real ministry" can only happen when you're at the building. Those outside the church don't visit without first checking you out online. , If your internet presence is nothing more than a billboard, potential connections via online engagement are missed.
What's the hold up?
The biggest human need of the future is not information or inspiration—it’s deep belonging. To be clear, belonging is not the same as tribalism, which is a major barrier to people coming to churches today. Tribalism is feeling like you’re part of a bigger thing, feeling allegiance, but not necessarily having deep, interpersonal connections. Belonging is being known and loved and knowing and loving - not because we’re “right” or even because we “agree” but because we trust. People are not finding this in churches.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
If a chariot of fire and whirlwind absconded with all the members of your staff today, would the people who came to pick up where they left off be able to figure out what they did and how they were doing it? For a Fortune 500 company, this is about productivity and sustainability, but in the church, system and task management is about empowering and equipping the saints for acts of service. Knowing how to lay out processes in order to let people participate in ministry work will create an adaptable (and organized!) organization.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Curating, remixing, and sharing have become at least as important as writing new material! Ministry leaders today have access to more well-crafted, sharable resources than ever. Combine that with the ease of recording, editing, the infinite new tools for creating interactive learning experiences, and you'll have an on-demand archive of resources for exploring God's Word well within reach.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Local and synchronous demands on ministry caused us to value generalists. There is certainly still a need for essential ministry skills. However, encouraging ministry staff to specialize and teaching them to rely more on one another (instead of feeling the need to write our own thing every time) will help each staff member excel more at the work they do.
What's the hold up?
So much of ministry is carried out by staff members who (whether they feel like it or not) are seen as professionals, making people in the crowd feel disqualified from helping. Instead of a culture that gives permission and guides people along the way, churches often struggle with a culture that says, "You can do this once you're good enough." For many, feeling like they're good enough will never come.
What's the hold up?
No single staff person can be an expert in everything, and people understand that. However, they don't understand when non-experts pretend to be experts and weigh in on things because they feel they need to, especially in an age when arranging interviews with professors or researchers or Jon Bauer is easier than ever. Reasonably so, the hyper-awareness people must endure as they are exposed to more information makes them more critical of the information they receive.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Talk to any pastor or church staff member who just worked their third sixty-five hour week in a row and the answer is clear: No. We have more tools than ever designed to help individual Christians identify and unlock their vocations. We have excellent tools for delegation and project management, and excellent people who are adept at using them.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Questions about the number of ministers available for churches will continue to exist for most mainline denominations. Dividing and delegating the work among specialists will both raise the quality of the work and fill in the gaps in knowledge, allowing local ministers to focus on evangelistic relationships and the management of groups and group health within their congregations.
Some things we won't filter out...
The future will still need Biblical truth. This framework is not meant to ask you to filter that out. It may, however, challenge you to consider how and when you deliver it. More importantly, the framework won't allow you to eliminate people. They're the ones we're trying to love. Without them, this is a pointless exercise.
The other reason to pick on programs, buildings, and people is that we have room to reform them. The Reformation handled a lot of teachings, but it didn't examine certain practices as much as it could have.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
You may provide excellent, edifying, and spiritually enriching experiences on Sundays at your church, but once they've happened, what of that can be recaptured? Even if you've taken to streaming or recording, how much better is the experience if you're "in the room?" If you grow and have to try to reproduce the service multiple times a week, how much effort will it take to provide the same quality of experience each time?
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
What we have at the moment is fine for preaching and listening, but awful for relationship development and interpersonal care, trust, and vulnerability. With what we know of group dynamics, have seen from support systems like AA, and learned from the spontaneous belonging of the internet community, we could create something that is more invitational, accessible, and effective.
Questions from the Future
Kent Reeder
Created on February 26, 2025
Start designing with a free template
Discover more than 1500 professional designs like these:
View
Microcourse: Team Cybersecurity
View
Microcourse: Key Skills for the Professional Environment
View
Microcourse: Introduction to HTML
View
The Meeting Microlearning
View
The Meeting Microlearning Mobile
View
Isometric video mobile
View
Circles video mobile
Explore all templates
Transcript
Questions from the
FUTURE
A framework for building Churches that remain beneficial.
She is from the future.
You are not.
Let's go!
You're at your computer, trying to figure out what your church should be up to. Suddenly you get a Zoom reminder for a meeting that is happening right now.
I'm late!
You don't remember having a meeting scheduled for this time, so as you log in and check your teeth in the preview video, you try to figure out what this is about.
As the meeting host lets you in, you see a 30(ish) year old woman you seem to recognize, but can't place. She introduces herself: Janae: Hi! Thanks for logging in. I know this is odd, but I'm Janae. You know me as the 10 year old girl that walks by your church on my way to school in the morning. Look...I'm calling from the future. I have some questions I wish I'd known to ask when I was younger.
For the sake of this presentation, lets just ignore the implications of time travel and future Zoom tech.
Continue
You: Ummm...OK. Are you sure this has to be a meeting? Couldn't it be an email from the future? Janae: You're such a Millenial. You: Fair.
Janae: Do you know this quote from Adam Grant's Hidden Potential? “It’s more important to be good ancestors than dutiful descendants. Too many people spend their lives being custodians of the past instead of stewards of the future. We worry about making our parents proud when we should be focused on making our children proud. The responsibility of each generation is not to please our predecessors—it’s to improve conditions for our successors.”
You: I've had that book on my reading list for like 4 years. I might even have it in my audiobook library...so, no.
[We can be done with the charade of a future Zoom meeting, but here's the thing: We have to figure out how to be good ancestors for future churches, now. Welcome to a presentation on the future, how to think about it, and how to adapt to it to serve the people in it.]
END OF INTRO
Continue
What would Janae ask?
We will lay out a framework for thinking about the future in a moment, but first, where can we apply it?
Janae walks by each day; that's all she knows of your ministry. So the things we'll analyze will be what she could see.
PROGRAMS, BUILDINGS, & PEOPLE
Why those?
Marshall McLuhan
"The medium is the message." This phrase, coined by futurist Marshall McLuhan in the 1960s, was his way of reflecting on the impact of television on future society. This reflection led him to predict, with startling accuracy, the internet, social media, and the present dysfunction of both. Our question is this: How did he do it? How was McLuhan able to have such an accurate analysis of the future? McLuhan believed that it is not just what we do but (mostly) how we do it that has impact.
PROGRAMS, BUILDINGS, & PEOPLEare a large portion of how we do it. They are the media,so what messages are we sending with them?
and...
Continue
The Love-is-sacred Framework
The framework uses three filters designed to help churches evaluate the extent to which they keep love as the only sacred thing. Like a multi-layered air filtration system, each filter removes that which is unnecessary, ensuring that what remains genuinely serves people and fosters the unconditional love of God among people.
HEAR MORE...
3. LEVEL UP?
1.HOLD UP?
2.GROUND UP?
One Example:
The Church in Acts 15
In Acts 15, we see the early church confront a practice and apply the filters. The Situation: As Christianity spread, more and more non-Jewish people were believing. A group of Jewish believers were insisting that new converts should be circumcised. The Hold Up: Peter, Paul, James, and other church leaders knew that this would be a problem for many. Requiring converts to adopt specific practices to find belonging in God's kingdom would be an obstacle. Wisely, in addressing this, James said these words: “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God." Acts 15:19 The Ground Up: The apostles had some new tools to employ as they addressed this. For one, Peter had been given a vision (back in Acts 10) that the laws regarding "cleanliness" no longer applied. Culture had changed! As a result, they proposed a very light set of rules intended to do one thing: foster loving relationships. The recommendations they make in their letter (Acts 15:29) exist to make it so that Gentile Christians wouldn't be unclean in the eyes of Jewish Christians (who were still observing Jewish laws) and could get together and be a community. The Level Up: This adjustment worked well for a version of Christianity that was still, in large part, Jewish, but would continue to diversify. Over time, the obstacle of circumcision (mostly) disappeared, and the church has continually referred to Acts 15 when considering how to connect with unique cultures and people groups. The move away from cultural homogeneity made leveling up in the future easier.
Continue
Using the Framework
This resource is meant to be your way of "picking the brain" of the future, getting a chance to explore at the pace and in the direction you find interesting and beneficial. From here forward, then, it's a bit of a choose your own adventure. You can...
Return to the framework/filters:
FRAMEWORK
Explore the how we do it topics:
PROGRAMS
BUILDINGS
PEOPLE
Dig a little deeper:
QUESTIONS
RESOURCES
BACK
Programs
There are many programs churches run that can be talked about, but let's focus on the big one: Sunday services. If we accept McLuhan’s premise that the medium is the message, then the way most churches structure their weekly gathering is sending an outdated message. The Sunday service, as it currently exists, was shaped by an era of scarcity of information and physical necessity—neither of which define the present nor future. Gathering dozens or hundreds of people into a room for a one-way communication experience is an artifact of a bygone media landscape. Let’s break this down by key shifts:
Could we help people experience love better by finding a primary mode of ministry that is more flexible, relational, and participatory without requiring everyone to be in the same room at the same time?
Shifts toward asynchronous and flexilocal.
Could we help people experience love better by engaging them in diverse art forms, co-creative experiences, and by giving them intentional space to absorb meaning in multi-sensory media?
Shifts toward co-creative, multi-modal uses of art.
In a post-scarcity of information age, the sermon-centric model is outmoded. Could we serve people better by curating and designing more easily accessible, engaging spiritual experiences, resources, and interactive journeys?
Shifts in the distribution and reception of information.
Could we help people experience love better by focusing on leading them into deep, trusting relationships with others, teaching them to avoid tribalism, and evaluating maturation in terms of vulnerability and belonging?
Shifts in the purpose and management of community.
BACK
BACK
Buildings
It isn't necessary or mandatory, but it is common and can be useful for ministry to have a facility. If we accept McLuhan’s premise that the medium is the message, then the way we setup, use, and share our spaces lets our members and community know what we want for them. A church building no longer needs to be the first or primary place people experience a spiritual community. They'll engage online first, relationally second, and physically last. If a church does invest in property, let it be as an act of service - not for members alone but as a resource for the entire community. Let’s break this down by key shifts:
Could we help people experience love better by using facilities as places to activate people to serve other people, instead of coming and expecting to be served?
Shifts when it comes to "who is served" by our buildings.
Could we help people experience love better by designing spaces where dialogue, expression, and vulnerable participation with others and the Word are a higher priority than one-way communication and passive attendance?
Shifts from the goal of proclamation to participation.
Could we help people experience love better by seeking to actively and personally engage with them (whether in a digital or physical space) so that they know the goal of this organization, always, is to care for them?
Shifts in the prioritizaton of digital and physical spaces.
Could we help people experience love better by creating third spaces designed for relationship development instead of trying to maximize attendance?
Shifts in the desired result of people occupying the same space.
BACK
BACK
People
By people, we mean all the people involved in the ministry - the staff and those to whom they minister. If we accept McLuhan’s premise that the medium is the message, then the way we structure leadership, relationships, and responsibility is itself forming people’s view of love, authority, and community. If the church is serious about preparing people for a future shaped by interconnection, complexity, and isolation, then we must shape ministry systems that form people for interdependence, agency, and belonging. Let’s break this down by key shifts:
Could we help people experience love better by shifting from authority to vulnerable trust, where belonging comes before belief and transformation comes through invitation?
Shifts in the way people perceive authority and roles.
Could we help people experience love better by rethinking the ways we confer and share responsibility?
Shifts in equipping and entrusting ministerial acts.
Could we help people experience love better by being the ones who carry the Word and sacraments into their daily lives and spaces?
Shifts in the accessibility and frequency of sacraments.
Could we help people experience love better if we utilize access to specialists, specialize our ministerium, and generalize the skill of people and group coordination?
Shifts in counseling and pastoral expertise.
BACK
Continue
Further Resources
SatisfiedDigital Worship Module
Rethinking PreachingArticle
Pastor as CuratorArticle
Stop Wasting ArtPresentation
The Coming Revolution in Church Economics Book
Unreasonable Hospitality Book
Tampa Underground Church Network Toolkit
The Art of Gathering Book
Reimagining Church Buildings Article
...or just reread the book of Acts with some friends!
Continue
Lead for the
FUTURE
You don't drive by looking only at the rearview mirror. Don't lead that way, either!
She says thanks for caring.
SHARE THIS!
Index
Future Zoom
Programs, Buildings, People
The Framework
Choose Your Own Adventure
Programs
Buildings
People
Questions
Resources
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Flexible, relational spaces would be more adaptable to cultural and techonological changes. By making spaces less dependent on single uses, spaces are able to evolve with changing needs. Organic community could still thrive as programmatic adjustments are made. Most importantly, people might find the church facility to be a true "third space" for them, developing a greater sense of ownership and desire to share the space with others.
What's the hold up?
Attending a weekly event is increasingly difficult for people, and it isn't just "laziness" or "lack of commitment." People are used to and expect to experience information and interpersonal connection instantly and anywhere. We live much more networked and decentralized existences than our ancestors, and our descendants will likely do the same.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
I'm aware that this particular point can be challenging for a Lutheran audience. It has been challenging to me as I've thought and begun to experiment with it. That being said, if relationships are the goal, and if we're trusting people to care for eachother, we can empower them with these tools. Giving your people permission to baptize converts and commune with one another is exciting and helps them treasure these effective tools that God has given us.
What's the hold up?
There is no more "holy-of-holies," but sometimes it seems like there is. Even if people have general access to scripture, there is still a common sense that it is "better" when they can look at it with a trained expert.Moreover, the sacraments remain enshrined in sanctuaries, and people have less access to communion than they could have. People are also afraid (or do not feel) they have permission to baptize others and, therefore, do not seek out the opportunity.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Technology and new tools have relatively little impact on the sacraments. The elements are the elements, we can't transmit them via DMs. Since we live in a flexilocal world with on-demand expectations, it's worth considering ways to deliver or empowering people to engage in the sacraments whenever it is beneficial.
What's the hold up?
There is a spirit of faithfulness in the desire to dedicate spaces and ministry tools exclusively to the proclamation of the Gospel, but this is a confusing and limiting practice. People end up developing a feeling that dedicated sanctuary spaces are somehow more holy than other spaces. This holiness can make people feel like they do not belong in such spaces, and that there is a difference between the way we interact with God's Word in one space vs. another.
What's the hold up?
Most church buildings are designed for passive gatherings: sanctuaries focus on seating capacity, lobbies are transition zones, and people have limited and controlled access to most spaces. This sends the message that the point of coming is to follow the prescribed path - that the building's true function is efficiency and programming, not facilitating connection and developing strong community.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Though the limitations of a dedicated space are obvious (and well-intentioned,) flexible use space is, by nature, more adaptable. Giving people a variety of experiences in a space will help them consider the ways that they and those they love can grow closer to God and one another. They'll seek to make special moments in that space in the future.We've already moved from standing room only to sitting in pews, and from pews to chairs. Giving ourselves space to continue to learn how people interact and grow will give us long term benefit.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Visual art used to be expensive and difficult to achieve. This is no longer the case (relatively speaking - though we aren't used to budgeting for it.) The need for live-led, corporately sung music can be a tremendous burden on small and mid-size congregations, but we seem to feel almost required to have it. Why such a focus on this when we have access to massive archives of video, poetry, images, and could easily have a WELS run library of rentable art pieces? (Especially in WI...)
What's the hold up?
Art is limited to a few primary uses in most weekend worship experiences: graphic design, lighting/decor, and corporately sung music. This works for some, but increasingly few. Corporate singing is less and less common in people's lives and very much connected to emotional experience (not didactic). Pinterest and Instagram have raised people's aesthetic expectations. Most significantly, if music is the primary art form in a worship setting, the visual learner is left behind.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
In the same way that our primary method of communicating with friends and loved ones is no longer travelling to them, but instead using technology to connect with them, a church facility would be at best a secondary way to connect people and be a community. Church property becomes an "IRL landing page" instead of the main place to engage with each other.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Whether a network of small groups, an intentionalized rhythm of personal and corporate growth opportunities, or some other method of making sure that each person your church serves has a trusted group of people they care for and rely on, find ways to integrate easy, usable tools that foster connection. Make connection first, content second. Love, informed by the love of Christ, will make the difference.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Since buildings are no longer essential for distributing information, we can help people see a building as a helpful avenue for them as they contribute to the lives of others through vocation (not just by volunteering to help with "church" duties.) A building can be a training ground at which people can find ways to care for the neglected and advocate for justice.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
By shifting church buildings from information distribution centers to activation training hubs, we create a future-ready model that expands people's capacity, not dependency. Activation hubs prioritize participation, skill-building, and application so that people leave more empowered than they arrived. As cultural and technological landscapes evolve, a church that trains and mobilizes its people can seamlessly transition into new methods, mediums, and models of ministry.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Gate-opening leadership makes congregations more resilient and adaptable by opening up the conversation to a wider variety of voices.This version of leadership is a little messier and more experimental, but trust and comaraderie grows as congregations take steps and leaps together. Culture like that can adapt to almost any environment.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Decentralized information empowers the people and ruins the gate-keepers. The good news is that control has never been the goal nor a meaningful tool in God's kingdom. "Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all.” Mark 9:35We can develop a bottom-up, servant leadership approach that thrives on mutual trust and gate-opening instead of gate-keeping.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
With a wider variety of furniture types, easy tools for dividing large spaces into smaller, more intimate ones, and a stronger focus on hospitality, we could develop ways to mix the reception of a message with interaction. We could eliminate urgency and, instead of hosting events, host get-togethers in which people are guided toward developing trusting, safe connections.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Your primary competition is no longer other denominations and congregations, the realities of a work-week, or the availability of a teacher.Now, we compete for people's attention. We compete with Netflix, the NFL, doom-scrolling, and the golden age of interactive digital content. How would you invest time and money to compete in that arena?
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
An integrated, hybrid digital-and-physical environment will look different from every community, and that's OK! Seeing each aspect of the environment as a tool to be modified is a much more adaptable approach than becoming accustomed to a specific space used a specific way and struggling to adjust later. In other words: move the furniture around today, and get your website and your building working seamlessly together.
What's the hold up?
Because people have access to more teachers, opinions, and "hot takes" than ever before, they are more resistant to centralized, position-conferred authority. As such, their trust must be earned. Unfortunately, common mindsets around the relationship between ministers and those to whom they minister demand a level of trust before relationship and acquiescence before belonging.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
It may feel like integrating a wider variety of art forms and artistic means of communication will feel strange and off-putting. This is the result of existing in a program that isn't adaptable - it's hard to level up. Unfortunately, "We just couldn't get away with that right now..." is another way to say, "We're going to fall further behind." Rethinking the weekend gathering's necessity and priority will open ministry up to a variety of exciting uses for art that will serve an increasingly diverse audience.
What's the hold up?
Long-form, single-take delivery of information has been shown to be a poor method of educating adults. If people are going to sit and listen they want to listen to experts who are fantastic at delivery (which is a gift not all share, and that's OK!) and people are open and willing to do this via a screen instead of in-person. The time and energy required to prepare and deliver a new sermon each week does not have the return on investment that it once did, and it doesn't serve the educational needs of the audience.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
When the temple curtain tore, God himself led the way in rebuilding our understanding of his place in our lives. What can we do to help people know God has come to be with them in every moment in a world in which meaning is developed through experience, not passive observation. When our spaces invite people to freely interact with God and one another in two-way communication, they'll carry those interactions with them everywhere.
What's the hold up?
Church buildings can offer rest and education, but when that’s all they provide, people approach them as consumers rather than empowered participants. If a space exists only for consumption, it becomes non-essential. People can find that same fulfillment elsewhere. When church buildings sit vacant 80% of the time and appear designed primarily for “insiders,” outsiders see no reason to step inside. A space that doesn’t activate people with purpose or belonging will always feel irrelevant to those on the outside.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Certainly, the ways that people consume media will change. Yesterday's encyclopedia is today's Wikipedia and tomorrow's Neuralink. However, an archive of material, digitally accessible and remixable, is much easier to "level up" for future applications than thousands of live events that have passed and are irretrievable. More importantly, we'll be ready (and therefore quicker) to pivot in the future, because it won't feel like we are starting from scratch.
What's the hold up?
Churches with buildings still tend to overvalue physical spaces while consistently undervaluing the ministry that can be done in digital spaces. People in those spaces then feel like the "real ministry" can only happen when you're at the building. Those outside the church don't visit without first checking you out online. , If your internet presence is nothing more than a billboard, potential connections via online engagement are missed.
What's the hold up?
The biggest human need of the future is not information or inspiration—it’s deep belonging. To be clear, belonging is not the same as tribalism, which is a major barrier to people coming to churches today. Tribalism is feeling like you’re part of a bigger thing, feeling allegiance, but not necessarily having deep, interpersonal connections. Belonging is being known and loved and knowing and loving - not because we’re “right” or even because we “agree” but because we trust. People are not finding this in churches.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
If a chariot of fire and whirlwind absconded with all the members of your staff today, would the people who came to pick up where they left off be able to figure out what they did and how they were doing it? For a Fortune 500 company, this is about productivity and sustainability, but in the church, system and task management is about empowering and equipping the saints for acts of service. Knowing how to lay out processes in order to let people participate in ministry work will create an adaptable (and organized!) organization.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Curating, remixing, and sharing have become at least as important as writing new material! Ministry leaders today have access to more well-crafted, sharable resources than ever. Combine that with the ease of recording, editing, the infinite new tools for creating interactive learning experiences, and you'll have an on-demand archive of resources for exploring God's Word well within reach.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Local and synchronous demands on ministry caused us to value generalists. There is certainly still a need for essential ministry skills. However, encouraging ministry staff to specialize and teaching them to rely more on one another (instead of feeling the need to write our own thing every time) will help each staff member excel more at the work they do.
What's the hold up?
So much of ministry is carried out by staff members who (whether they feel like it or not) are seen as professionals, making people in the crowd feel disqualified from helping. Instead of a culture that gives permission and guides people along the way, churches often struggle with a culture that says, "You can do this once you're good enough." For many, feeling like they're good enough will never come.
What's the hold up?
No single staff person can be an expert in everything, and people understand that. However, they don't understand when non-experts pretend to be experts and weigh in on things because they feel they need to, especially in an age when arranging interviews with professors or researchers or Jon Bauer is easier than ever. Reasonably so, the hyper-awareness people must endure as they are exposed to more information makes them more critical of the information they receive.
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
Talk to any pastor or church staff member who just worked their third sixty-five hour week in a row and the answer is clear: No. We have more tools than ever designed to help individual Christians identify and unlock their vocations. We have excellent tools for delegation and project management, and excellent people who are adept at using them.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
Questions about the number of ministers available for churches will continue to exist for most mainline denominations. Dividing and delegating the work among specialists will both raise the quality of the work and fill in the gaps in knowledge, allowing local ministers to focus on evangelistic relationships and the management of groups and group health within their congregations.
Some things we won't filter out...
The future will still need Biblical truth. This framework is not meant to ask you to filter that out. It may, however, challenge you to consider how and when you deliver it. More importantly, the framework won't allow you to eliminate people. They're the ones we're trying to love. Without them, this is a pointless exercise.
The other reason to pick on programs, buildings, and people is that we have room to reform them. The Reformation handled a lot of teachings, but it didn't examine certain practices as much as it could have.
Will this make it easy to Level Up later?
You may provide excellent, edifying, and spiritually enriching experiences on Sundays at your church, but once they've happened, what of that can be recaptured? Even if you've taken to streaming or recording, how much better is the experience if you're "in the room?" If you grow and have to try to reproduce the service multiple times a week, how much effort will it take to provide the same quality of experience each time?
Would we build what we have if we were building from the Ground Up?
What we have at the moment is fine for preaching and listening, but awful for relationship development and interpersonal care, trust, and vulnerability. With what we know of group dynamics, have seen from support systems like AA, and learned from the spontaneous belonging of the internet community, we could create something that is more invitational, accessible, and effective.