Note from Richard Bales to readers of the following "Chapter 4" which includes the Acorn Prayer - which is on the 3rd page of this section - and "Our ten year experience of prayer." This is a chapter from a dissertation that is a case study of First United Methodist of Canyon, Texas during the 1990�s.
These pages provide a chronology of our experience of prayer. We believe all the progress we have seen in this decade is truly the result of prayer. The material in "Second, Third, and Fourth Main Themes" provides a glimpse of the answers we believe we have received from God. The chapter concludes with additional insights on how prayer was woven into the tapestry of the congregation of First United Methodist of Canyon, Texas. I pray that the chronology of these experiences provides you helpful insights for your own prayer life and the prayer life of the Body of Christ through which you serve the risen Savior, Jesus Christ.
Yours in His service,
Richard Bales, District Superintendent Big Spring District
(formerly Senior pastor First United Methodist Church)
Big Spring District Office PO Box 3239 Big Spring, TX 79720 915-263-1259
Email : [email protected]
The quoted comments presented in this chapter were drawn from four focus groups in the congregation of First United Methodist of Canyon, Texas. Four main themes, which arose from the focus group research, are stated below with the total number of comments or quotations related to that theme:
Prayer - 25 entries
Richard�s leadership style - 25 entries
Involving all generations in leadership and decisions - 19 entries
Unity-cohesiveness of congregation - 15 entries
The first portion of this chapter is organized around these four themes. Each is presented with the focus group comments to provide a brief definition of that theme from the perspective of congregation members. Each theme is then expanded with illustrative experiences to show how this main theme became a dominant characteristic in the life of our congregation in this decade. The annotation following the comments provides a single letter abbreviation for the generation of the person and then the initials of the person making the comment (C - Civic, birth years 1901-1924, A - Adaptive, birth years 1925-1942, I- Idealist, birth years 1943-1960, R - Reactive, birth years 1961-1981; two letters - Person�s initials).
The following focus group comments isolated prayer as one of the four most significant characteristics of our congregation in the 1990�s:
Everything done was "grounded in prayer" always praying to seek God�s will regarding any event. (I-fp)
It began with Richard and Noreen. They prayed us into the place we are by leading one to prayer, that one leading another, and a third - the domino effect - we became a praying church. (I -ml)
We have become a praying church both in our groups and committees and individually. (C-fl)
In problem solving, "the emphasis was on prayer for guidance" (R-tg).
The confirmation, often through prayer, that, "If we believe in letting God lead us, then nothing is impossible." (A-ac)
Prayer led to our vision and then the decisions that led to our growth. (R-tg)
"Richard listened to God in prayer and carried this over to his love for people who did the same." (R-jw)
Our Emerging Experience of Prayer. Prayer emerged in the life of our congregation in quiet emphases in the early months of June, July, and August following my appointment as pastor in Canyon in mid-1990. The first comment above, "Everything done was �grounded in prayer� always praying to seek God�s will regarding any event," is an accurate description of our unfolding experience of prayer. Each meeting was intentionally opened and closed in prayer. Committees, boards, and even office meetings of two or three people were begun and ended in prayer. Our weekly staff meetings particularly focused on a prayer time as we began and ended. In addition I asked each staff member to follow the pattern I had set of leading the opening prayer and presenting a short devotional. Even though this was a relatively new experience for some staff members, they graciously followed this prayer-devotional pattern of opening the staff meetings. Soon the comment "everything was grounded in prayer" became a reality as both staff and congregation members articulated their feelings about this regular prayer pattern with the following comment or similar affirmations: "Now it feels like our meetings have not really started until we have taken time to pray." Our diaconal minister-program director, Francie Pittman, was asked by a colleague what she particularly noticed in the first year of "your new pastor�s tenure" and Francie responded, "We pray about everything, and I like it."
In addition to these more quiet processes, our worship services provided opportunities to more publicly emphasize prayer. A sermon series on prayer was underscored with bulletin inserts that provided prayers and prayer patterns. One was an anonymous "Acorn Prayer" that members later pulled from Bibles and purses as they told me this prayer had helped them in their prayer time, even enabling some to begin a regular pattern of daily prayer. The Acorn Prayer insert included two scripture verses to provide additional emphasis to its meaning.
Lord God, I am yours totally and completely without reservation. Use me as you wish, send me where you will, for I am dead and my life is hidden with Christ in God.
References:
Galatians 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
John 12:24 I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds.
The bulletin inserts also included prayer patterns, including the familiar "ACTS" - adoration, confession, thanksgiving, and supplication pattern - with a brief explanation or focus for that element of the pattern.
Men�s Prayer Group - A Key to Our Unfolding Prayer Emphasis. Another key element in this emerging experience of prayer was a men�s prayer group begun by John Barnhart, the first male in our congregation to attend the Walk to Emmaus. He returned from Emmaus inspired to begin a small group to continue his own spiritual renewal and join with others in the process. In a matter of days of his decision, John was in a staff parish relations committee meeting. Bea Clark, the chairperson and a second generation member of this congregation, mentioned that prayer had not been emphasized in this congregation and that she did not remember any training or classes on how to pray or how to have a quiet time and mature in your prayer life. John sensed that this comment was a prompting from the Lord to begin his small group as a prayer group for men to learn to pray.
He contacted twelve men that he believed would share his desire to learn to pray and invited them to his home on a Tuesday morning in February 1991. We began meeting for prayer and have met there every Tuesday, including holidays, for nine years. This process of learning to pray aloud in a group was new and challenging experience even for these who agreed to participate. So John and I distributed slips of paper inviting each man to write one thing for which he was thankful and one for which he had concern. Each person was given freedom to verbalize his prayer or simply participate silently. Most of us did verbalize a brief prayer, even in that opening session. Gradually each person became more confident praying aloud without prompting notes, and on many Tuesday mornings every person in the groups lifted a verbal prayer to the Lord, especially the concerns we had for others. The group decided that an opening devotional by one person in the group would help focus the prayer time, so we all agreed to accept this responsibility on a rotating basis. The devotion leader then opened and closed the prayer for the morning. The whole prayer meeting, including coffee and fellowship before and after the prayer time, lasted forty-five minutes so these men could depart for work on time.
When I reviewed the ages of the initial group, I realized these men were all Idealists or Adaptives in the beginning. However, men in the Civic generation soon began attending at the invitation of men in the group. In later month the Reactives also began attending in significant numbers. The Civic members seldom, if ever participated in the verbal prayer, but they were among the most regular in attendance.
As the group began to grow, informal discussions in the fellowship time led to the question of how many can attend the group and still allow the prayer time to be participatory for all desiring to verbalize prayers. We initially agreed that twelve to fifteen would be the maximum, and if more came we should divide into two prayer circles after the opening moments of coffee and fellowship. One member of the group, Jon Lair, who had attended an Emmaus Walk in early 1992, felt a clear motivation to invite twenty or more to begin attending the group. However, he felt strongly that a requirement to divide the group would diminish its effectiveness and its ministry to the personal lives of the men. So we carefully reconsidered our twelve to fifteen guidelines and consented to Jon�s plan. Jon not only invited twenty or more to attend, he did so for over five years, even setting his automatic phone dialer to call and remind each person of the prayer group each Monday evening. As a result, by mid 1993, the group regularly had an average of over thirty and peak attendance was over forty-five.
One of the Civics quietly, and almost apologetically, asked if we could include the Lord�s Prayer to our closing moments to allow every man in the group to lift one verbal prayer each week. The group gladly agreed and as a result two benefits emerged. One was that every man did participate, at least in the Lord�s prayer. Second, the devotional leader who was responsible for the opening and closing prayer became accustomed to inviting others to join in prayer with a simple lead-in statement, "Now let us join in the prayer Jesus taught His disciples �Our Father . . . �" This second benefit had far reaching effects on the lives, homes, and families of these men. They would quietly tell me that they understood they could become spiritual leaders in their homes where they had often been hesitant or timid before. One by one these men began telling me how he had begun a pattern of calling his family to the breakfast or supper table early for a devotional time he planned and led. Others gathered their family for a devotional time just before they all retired to bed for the night.
Affirmations of Prayer As A Main Theme in Our Congregation. When men regularly began taking leadership for devotional times in their homes, the wives of these men reported the joy they experienced as their husbands participated in the spiritual life of their family. These wives often referred to their husbands as the spiritual leader of the home.
One focus group comment in the listing above is an appropriate summary of the overall experience, "We have become a praying church both in our groups and committees and individually." The overall atmosphere of prayer led to a freedom for individual members to launch into prayer about everything. For instance, when we faced challenging decisions about adding an associate pastor and a contemporary worship service, members of the congregation spontaneously organized prayer vigils. Others organized regular times of fasting and prayer asking Lord to guide and direct all we said, considered, and ultimately decided with his wisdom.
This spontaneous freedom in prayer led to members volunteering to go to the prayer room during the worship service to pray for each person who registered their attendance in worship that day. In our recent church consultation with Herb Miller, he asked whether the announcement in worship that all those who register their attendance would be prayed for by a team in the prayer room had increased or decreased the number of people registering. I assured him that the stack of registration slips had definitely grown with this addition to our prayer ministry. Second, In his closing summary comments, Herb told the congregation members, "When you begin receiving phone calls from churches as far away as Michigan about what you are doing as a congregation in prayer, you can know I am the culprit. I gave them the name of your church because you are doing some wonderful and wise things in your prayer life as a congregation."
In addition to these verbal affirmations, I recognized that these prayer emphases had also enabled us as a congregation to experience further incarnational ministry. Not only were we recognizing and understanding the needs of others we were responding to those needs by lifting them to the Lord for his blessing.
The following focus group comments isolated my pastoral leadership as another prominent characteristics of our congregation in the 1990�s:
"Richard�s �Christ-centered� leadership such as an absolute devotion to the power
of prayer, and the attempt to equip the congregation as disciples of Christ." (I-kd)
A very pro-active attempt to develop open communication with regard to major
events. (A-dp)
"Richard set up the proper processes to create consensus without dividing the
church, especially in regard to the contemporary service and hiring of an
associate pastor." (R-tg)
"The unity in the church that has developed through Richard�s leadership which
resulted in everyone working together in spite of differences." (A-dp)
Richard�s leadership style of emphasis on prayer for guidance, his openness and
his process of getting everyone involved especially the various generations. (R-
tg)
"As a direct result of Richard�s leadership, we experienced God and the Holy
Spirit like it never was felt before. All activities were �God-centered� as a result
of the emphasis on prayer as a way to resolve differences and achieve results." (A- jw)
The church seemed to embrace change through excellent communications and
leadership. (R-jw)
"Richard�s willingness to relinquish leadership and ownership of ideas. He was
never threatened. God made Richard a shepherd to help lead others." (I-ml)
How Leadership Emerged in this Decade. Two focus group comments provide an opening summary of how this leadership emerged in our congregation.
"Richard set up the proper processes to create consensus without dividing the church, especially in regard to the contemporary service and hiring of an associate pastor." [The most significant thing that has happened was] "The unity in the church that has developed through Richard�s leadership which resulted in everyone working together in spite of differences."
I believe these humbling comments about my pastoral leadership are affirmations that the Lord provided these insights as a gracious gift, both through prayer and through the doctor of ministry classes especially the books highlighted in the literature review. First the Lord guided me and other leaders in the congregation to wise choices that involved the generational groups in all major decisions we faced. The leadership classes and books further identified the six exposures needed in individual change and eight steps necessary for healthy organizational change. In addition the honor versus anger principles which were especially visible in the "hats" process of publicly naming and respecting the feelings of others defined the leadership process and style that enabled unity in our generational diversity. The honoring processes also allowed us to experience incarnational ministry as we recognized and honored the needs of others.
The following focus group comments identified the process of involving all four generations as another significant characteristics of our congregation in the 1990�s:
An active process of making sure the various generations within the church were
represented on all boards and decision-making committees whenever possible.
(C-kw)
The spiritual atmosphere that was created by getting all generations to participate
in the decision making processes and always emphasizing communication
through prayer. (I-kd)
"Intentionally having the different generations within the church represented on
each committee helped to develop good, open communications and a seeking to
understand and respect the other�s position." (C-kw)
Continuing to emphasize the importance of including all generations in
developing the vision of the church and soliciting their participation. (A-ws)
The Phase III "Building Together in Faith" testimonies helped generations to
understand each other. (R-sr)
The Phase III emphasis on "Equal Sacrifice; not Equal Giving," allowed a
crossing of all generations to contributing according to their ability and their
willingness to sacrifice. (A-jw)
I would summarize by saying that Richard�s leadership, the processes of sharing
input, his emphasis on prayer at all meetings and communications, led to the
various generations having a healthy respect for each other�s opinions. (A-ws)
Good leadership models were present in all generations. (I-jb)
How Generations Were Involved. The opening focus group comment on involving generations was offered by a three-year member of the nominations committee: "An active process of making sure the various generations within the church were represented on all boards and decision-making committees whenever possible" (was most a prominent event in the decade). This person had observed the meticulous process our nominations committee had followed to provide a balance of the four generations in all the committees and boards of the church. Another focus group comment summarized one of the important results of this balance: "Intentionally having the different generations on each committee helped develop good, open communications and a seeking to understand and respond to each other�s opinions."
This process of open communications was especially visible in the worship work area during the fourteen months this group considered our contemporary worship service. Through the nomination committee process, this group had grown to over twenty-five members in the two years prior to the 1996 discussions of the contemporary service. Although the size of the group seemed unwieldy at the time, the sheer number of individuals from all four generations insured that the opinions of each group were articulated. As tensions rose in this large group because of the philosophical and theological differences within the generational groups, this large group was introduced to the honoring principle of "hats." These hats opinions and feelings were preserved in the form of minutes and distributed and redistributed in all subsequent meetings of the congregation when this subject was addressed. As a result of having all four generation�s feelings repeatedly presented, there was a sense that their feelings were not only expressed, they were also heard. A focus group comment articulated this sense of open, responsive communication: "This resulted in a process that was always open and receptive to the opinions of others and these opinions and feelings were not only listened to but were acted upon."
How "Being Heard" Enabled Incarnational Ministry. This "bring heard" atmosphere allowed the honoring principle to grow and become part of the fabric of our congregation. One focus group comment is an example of how this principle has been incorporated: "It broke my heart when I realized that when we said we wanted praise and worship, others heard us saying they were not praising and worshiping in the traditional service." This comment is a significant illustration of the benefits of all four generations being involved, because the person who had offered the comment participated in the worship work area in all phases of the discussion and consideration of the contemporary service. She had been present when the greatest tension and critical comments were made (sometimes directed toward her). She had also been present throughout the time the honoring principles were beginning to grow throughout the congregation. In the focus group reflection, her primary focus was on the sadness and pain others had experienced. Her statement is a clear example of the incarnational ministry that has enabled unity in the midst of our enlarged diversity as a congregation. Her comment leads to the fourth main theme of our experience: unity and cohesiveness.
These focus group comments identified unity and cohesiveness as another significant characteristic of our congregation in this decade:
The unity that has developed through Richard�s leadership resulted in everyone
working together in spite of differences (was most significant). (A-dp)
"The willingness of everyone to pull together and work together" (was the most
significant aspect of our congregation in this decade). (C-kw).
The emphasis on prayer at all meetings led to the various generations having a
healthy respect for each other�s opinions. This helped bring consensus where
there might have been turmoil and a splitting of membership. (R-tg)
Gently bringing others together, instead of pushing them, avoiding being
judgmental. (R-jl)
Each generation became more open and understanding of each other�s feelings.
(R-gw)
"Each generation was not only listened to but �heard.� Various committees and
key individuals actively respected each other (with some exceptions of course)
and sought to understand each other." (C-kw)
"Richard set the proper processes to create consensus without dividing the
church, especially in regard to the contemporary service and hiring of an
associate pastor." (R-tg)
The creativity that resulted from the way the meetings were handled and the
participation of all generations in the decision making process (helped resolve
problems). (I-mr)
How Unity and Cohesiveness Emerged. In the focus groups, members of the Civic and Reactive generations (the oldest and youngest generations) emphasized that they missed seeing friends with whom they had shared close ties when they were worshiping together in the sanctuary before the contemporary service began. The Reactives offered comments about missing "those who were like grandparents to my children." These comments articulated a prevalent feeling that unity in our congregation is highly valued and desired regardless of the style of worship the individuals prefer. The focus group comment about "consensus without dividing the church" represented a repeated theme of members of the congregation. Some stated this theme from the perspective that they felt the "we may have divided the congregation into two separate churches or groups by beginning the contemporary service."
That concern over "dividing" was fortunately addressed in our recent church consultation by Herb Miller. He reassured us by saying that we needed to learn a new phrase to describe our church now. He said, "You have not divided the congregation, rather you have multiplied your congregation. You have become a congregation of congregations." He went on to assure us that our concerns over the changes were feelings of discomfort over the change rather than an indication of division. He then made this important observation that has increased our sense of unity and cohesiveness: "You have succeeded in fulfilling the great commission through your wise choices to expand your worship opportunities. You have significantly increased your ability to reach new people through cross-cultural evangelism." These comments have increased our ability to recognize our unity in diversity and helped us begin to celebrate the blessings we are receiving by maintaining unity and cohesiveness in the midst of greater diversity.
Main Themes in the "Problems Arising" Categories. The four main theme comments focus almost exclusively on the events in our congregation that made it healthier and enabled it to grow. In order to provide balancing data, I also include a summary of the "problems arising" categories from the focus groups.
All the comments and evaluations emerging from problem categories related to the three major decisions which were addressed in the literature review chapter: the Phase III building, adding an associate pastor, and the contemporary worship service. Five comments in the focus groups related to the contemporary worship service. Four comments, respectively, related to the building decision and the associate pastor decision. These are the types of comments made:
There was an emotional attachment to the old sanctuary. (A-jw)
There was a concern about how to get the money for the new building, and the
associate pastor. (A-lg).
The two older generations tend to be more conservative financially, while the
younger two tend to be more willing to risk financially. (A-dp)
Initial perceptions (about the contemporary service) were based on a lack of
knowledge, which led to judgments based on what is best for "my" generation.
Later perceptions were based on greater knowledge, and that led to a greater
respect for the views and concerns of the other generation. (R-sr)
The last comment was typical of many made during the four sessions. When a problem area was discussed, often the person would offer a balancing comment that implied ways the problem was addressed and brought to resolution. Three more comments reflect this same brighter side and resolution-seeking attitude:
"These three decisions could have �blown us apart,� and yet they didn�t." (A-md)
"The primary decisions were all potentially very divisive, but in the end we were
more united." (I-sd)
"I wondered if the contemporary worship decision would lead to divisiveness, but
it didn�t." (I-pl)
The focus group design contributed to this resolution-seeing attitude. However, this positive outlook is also consistent with the attitude of congregation members throughout the decade I have been pastor. They look for the brighter side and are willing to exert significant energy to discover it.
Interpreting the Data. The initial insight for interpreting the data arose as I identified the generations most often commenting on these themes. For instance, those most often citing congregational unity were members of the Civic and Adaptive generations. Those most often citing our four-generation leadership diversity and the respect, which arose among the generations, were Reactives and Idealists. Both observations were significant for me and, I believe, for the health of our congregation. The affirmation by the Civics and Adaptives (those over the age of fifty-five) that unity is a predominant theme of the congregation communicated volumes about the effectiveness of the decision-making processes. The primary decisions were potentially divisive, in the superlative. This unity identified by the Civic and Adaptive generations further underscores why the main themes of our focus groups were prayer and pastoral leadership style. Prayer and leadership led to this unity.
A similar understanding emerged in the main theme affirmed by the Idealist and Reactive generations, which was the growing respect among the four generations. These two generations under fifty-five recognized the value of our four-generation leadership diversity and the crucial wisdom and stability they received from the Civics and Adaptives. This is a powerful affirmation that honor versus anger principles from the literature review have been woven throughout the tapestry of our congregation. The respect and honor extended from the Reactives and Idealists to the Adaptives and Civics underscores why the younger members would identify prayer and leadership as keys to our health and growth. Especially the younger two generations perceive with clarity that our congregation is indeed fortunate to be experiencing unity in the midst of leadership diversity and particularly in the midst of rapid growth. The identification of prayer and leadership as primary characteristics in our congregation suggests that our congregation has grown, in part, because we are fortunate to be a denominational church with four generations present in large numbers. The willingness to risk entering the challenging decisions to reach others more effectively for Christ was balanced in crucial ways by the wisdom and appropriate caution not to move too quickly before adequate resources were available to sustain the efforts. Members of our congregation in all four generations are now recognizing and giving thanks to God for answering the many prayers lifted to him for both willingness to risk and for appropriate caution. This gratitude is another evidence of the growing experience of incarnational ministry of honoring the needs and perspectives of others.
Statistical Data Add to Understanding of Leadership Diversity. Leadership diversity and the intentional inclusion of all four generations raised a question in my dissertation Congregation Reflection Group. How is this different from most United Methodist Churches in America? The answers are not definitive but certainly illustrative. A Gallup poll in 1993, quoted in the Lubbock Northwest Texas Conference worship workshop which led to our contemporary worship discussions, reported that in 60 percent of United Methodist churches in America the average member age is fifty-five. In half of those churches the average age is sixty-five or above. The average age of members in Canyon is forty-one.
Another question was how did the inclusion of the youngest generation - the Reactive generation - impact the overall average age of elected leaders in our congregation? Did we maintain our balance and diversity while adding this generation? Again the answer is not definitive, but it provides some clarity. I compared the average age of all elected leaders in 1990 and in 1998. In 1990 the average age of all leaders - without any Reactive Generation members in any group - was 48.5. In 1998, after adding this generation to our elected leadership the average age was 46.3. This is a change of 2.2 years younger. The data are not conclusive but they suggest that as we added a younger generation to our leadership the efforts to include more Civics and Adaptives helped us maintain our balance among the four generations. These statistical data affirm what one Reactive member said in the focus groups, that one of the most significant aspects of our congregation in this decade is the richness of diversity in our elected leadership.
Interpreting the Nature and of Our Unity. A Sunday school class analogy helps me understand the nature of our unity. It would be one thing to hear individuals in a twelve-member Sunday school class, who are all the same age and have the same perspectives and interests, mention the unity they experience in the class. It would be quite another thing to hear individuals of a twelve-member Sunday school class, consisting of four different age groups, each with different perspectives and interests, mention the unity they experience in the class.
The unity reported in our focus groups is much more like that in the latter class in the analogy. From the literature review, it is evident that the four generations of our congregation have their own perspectives and interests in worship and financial stewardship. Members of these four generations have experienced three significant decisions involving financial stewardship and worship preferences. In the process they expressed different views and disagreed about a whole range of issues related to these decisions. After experiencing all that, these same members reported that one of "the most significant aspects of our congregation" is "our unity" and our "willingness to pull together and work together" (see "Unity and Cohesiveness" quotations). That we experienced harmony and willingness to work together would have been significant. That members cited unity and the willingness to work together as two of the most significant aspects of our congregation in this decade borders on remarkable. It was also significant that three of the congregation members citing this unity are in the Civic and Adaptive generations and have a combined membership tenure of over 100 years in this congregation.
Interpreting How Prayer and Leadership Enabled Unity. This reporting of unity and diversity raises the question of "why?" The data identify one answer to this question: the interrelationship of prayer and leadership style. This becomes more visible by asking a pair of questions: 1) Did the style of leadership produce the overarching predominance of prayer? Or 2) did prayer produce the style of leadership? My answer is an emphatic yes to both questions.
Determining which preceded or followed is neither necessary nor important. The essential observation from the data is that both are interwoven in ways that extend into the fabric of the four generations and into their lives and ministries so that greater unity became part of the tapestry of our congregation. The comments from generation members above and below fifty-five underscore that prayer and leadership woven together enabled the gathering of our four-generation leadership and also encouraged unity and willingness to work together in our congregation. Their observations describe how diversity and unity both became significant aspects of our congregation they were enabled by the interweaving of both prayer and leadership style into the lives and ministries of all four generations in our congregation.
Interpreting Prayer as Dependency on God. Two additional insights conclude this interpretation of data and lead to the conclusion chapter. The first insight is the result of another statement from Clark Pinnock�s book, Flame of Love: "Prayer is evidence of dependency on God" (145).
The data in this chapter about the predominance of prayer in our congregation open an insight about our dependency on God. Prayer, viewed through the perspective of dependence, is the primary means that we as a congregation acknowledge our dependence on God. The overarching predominance of prayer in our church implies that, as a body, we thoroughly and consistently acknowledge our dependency to the point we recognize that we totally rely on him. Especially we depend on God to enable us for ministry.
That leads to a second insight and quote from Pinnock: "Because mission is holistic, it must be empowered - it simply cannot be carried out by human wisdom and strength. Actions have to be initiated and empowered by the Spirit" (145). The predominance of prayer recognized by the focus groups suggests that we understand this essential empowering. The specific statement, "We experienced God and the Holy Spirit like it never was felt before" (along with similar statements), suggests that we have also received this empowering by the Holy Spirit so necessary for holistic ministry.
The term "holistic" accurately describes our church and adds insight to why it is healthy and growing. The focus group research cited the predominance of prayer, the leadership style, the four-generation leadership diversity, and the strength of unity in our congregation. These cited qualities confirm the holistic nature of this congregation and form part of the tapestry that displays the beauty, strength, and health of our congregation.
Additional note: A prayer workbook by Maxie Dunnam was an important enabling guide for us. It is: The Workbook of Living Prayer, Maxie Dunnam, published by Upper Room Books, Nashville, 1994. The ISBN is 0-8358-0718-5. This six-week guide is appropriate for small groups, Sunday school classes, and larger groups. It is also appropriate for personal study. The workbook has Daily Guides for each day of the week and a Group Meeting session to conclude each week�s study. The introduction to this 20th Anniversary Edition of the Workbook of Living Prayer includes a brief explanation of how this workbook has transformed thousands of lives.