Small Church Big Footprint

One of my favorite pastors is Bruce Logue. Bruce pastors Life Spring church in Merced California. The church is about 50 people when everyone shows up. I visited them a number of years ago and was impressed by the love Bruce exhibited not only for the people in his very diverse little church but also for the people who do not attend. Bruce is not only active in the Rotary he takes the lead on civic groups who are trying to help his city make a comeback. After spending a few days with him it became evident that many people who did not attend his church consider him to be their pastor and Bruce considers himself to be their pastor. Bruce’s wife works full time so Bruce can practice his ministry fulltime.

Rose Swetman pastors Vineyard Community Church in Shoreline Washington, She and I planted this church a number of years ago along with a group of other unsung heroes. After failing (under my leadership) to grow a mega church I handed the church over to Rose who along with her husband Rich (another life long friend) has led Vineyard Community Church to become one of the most influential churches in Seattle. Rather than focusing on growing a Big church she’s grown a church Big. Big reach in a small area, big influence with local leaders (same as Bruce) and big heart for hurting people by starting a non-profit called Turning Point. Rose also plays poker every Monday night and has a forthcoming book that talks about what she’s learned about God around the poker table. It’s titled appropriately enough, Poker Pastor.

Edmonds is a comfortable suburb north of Seattle. Barry Crane is the pastor of a vibrant little (well it’s not so little anymore) church in downtown Edmonds. Barry cannot walk around Edmonds without being accosted by someone who wants to talk with him and most of those people have never attended Barry’s church North Sound Church. Recently Barry and his team decided they should start planting more churches. After looking around the area and not wanting to join the project a pastor club they decided to start an Anglican Church right inside their own (non denominational but we really used to be Baptists or Charismatics) church. That’s right. Instead of planting another version of themselves down the block they asked around and discovered that what people really wanted was an Anglican version of themselves. So a few months ago Holy Trinity Anglican Church began services in the same building as North Sound Church under the leadership of Father Ryan Brotherton.

In our new book Question Mark – why the church welcomes bullies and how to stop it. Doug Murren and I offer several suggestions for how the church could not only stop bad actors from getting behind the pulpit but also turn the current situation of church decline around. One of those ideas is that we need twenty new models of church planting. One size no longer fits all. These pastors and churches paint a picture of the future of a vibrant church. Small churches with a big footprint.

Question Mark Book Launch Party


I’ve been part of a group who for the past ten years worked to remove a religious bully named Mark Driscoll from a position of influence in Seattle and beyond.

My new book written with Doug Murren, Question Mark – why the church welcomes bullies and how to stop it, recounts the process but more importantly clarifies the causes and offers solutions.

The book will be published as an ebook and available on all platforms soon


You can get a pre release copy by purchasing a ticket to the book release party on Feb 27th in Seattle.

The tickets are only $10 and not only include the download of the book but also wine and appetizers, live jazz and an opportunity to hear from some of the people who led the process.

Jim Wellman Professor of American Religion at UW
Stephanie Drury – Religious satirist and creator of #fakedrsicoll
Rob Smith – Former Mars Hill Deacon and Provocateur
Rose Swetman – First pastor in Seattle to publicly call Driscoll out

Unbroken Unfaithful

I’m a fan of women. We need more women leading everything and everywhere. Men need to take a break from leading so much. Men have worn out their welcome and generally messed things up sufficiently enough to legitimize my suggestion.

Which explains my reluctance to criticize one of only two women in to achieve major league director status in Hollywood this year, Angelina Jolie.

I’m a WWII history junkie. To call me a student would not be too far off. Unbroken was a great read. I consumed the book. Angies movie version (IMHO) was derivative, predictable and typical. Nothing really special artistically or technically.

They don’t say it out loud but “Angie” is a poster child for social justice issues and revered by millions of millennial Christians as representing the “real thing” of what it means to follow Jesus in this broken world. You may not like knowing that but it’s true.

Here’s where she missed the boat.Here’s where Angie  was unfaithful with Unbroken. Here’s where she took the money and ditched the truth about Louis Zamperini.

“Zamp” got saved at the historic Billy Graham crusade in LA in 1949. That’s what turned Zamp around. It was his encounter with Jesus that enabled him to forgive his enemies. That’s what set him on a new path of openly proclaiming his love for Jesus up until his death earlier this year. And that’s the story Angie skipped telling.

Instead she pitched the safe, generic Orpah (whom I adore) version of spirituality.

Forget Boomer Christians, most of us are hard set, conservative and never met a celebrity non Christian we couldn’t find a way to minimize, dismiss or send to Hell regardless of how exemplary a life they lived. Forget us… were dying and about to disappear (finally many would say) from the world stage.

Millennials are open minded but still stuck on Jesus. Angie could have simply told the truth about Zamp (Billy G and all). It would have been an historic opening between Hollywood and Millennial Christians. People don’t like it when you call their Grandpa names even if they agree with you. People don’t like it when you ignore their history and ask them to pay $15 for the privilege or watching you do it. Even Millennials have brains.

In Unbroken, Angie (whom I respect) was artistically and spiritually unfaithful. She chickened out. She should have checked with her Baptist in laws before making the final cut.


Clever Titles Do Not Sell Books

I’ve written five books and am about to release my sixth. I never thought Id write one book.

I have had an interesting journey with book titles. Titles are very very very important however as stand alone elements, they don’t sell books. People buy books for a variety of reasons the chief one being a friend who recommends it to you or if the title immediately indicates that the book will solve a problem for you

My friend Paul wrote The Shack, which so far has sold 20 million copies in the past 8 years and been read by at least 100 million other people who were lent a copy by their friend. What does the title say? Not much, but the image on the cover says ‘mystery” inside and that promise along with the incredible word of mouth the book has received has been enough to prompt millions of people to take a chance.

While spending the 2-3 seconds humans typically allot for reflecting on a book title, the subconscious question we’re really asking is “is it worth it?” People’s relationship with time is our fiercest opponent when it comes to motivating them to take a chance on a book. The title can tilt them. All other things being equal, the title is the proverbial toe in the door.

For example I recently read (consumed is more apt) a book titled “Markets of One”. I liked the interplay between the word Markets (plural) with the word One (singular). That title suggested that getting people to buy new ideas, (a topic of great interest to me) really is just as I suspected a highly individualized process. The main title was enhanced by the fore title, “113 million” which I only noticed as my mind scanned the page for other reasons to suggest that this book might satiate my curiosity about human behavior. (Which it did and which is why I now recommend “Markets of One” as one of the most important books I’ve read in the past 5 years)

I offer this as backdrop as to why I’ve decided to stick with the much disputed  for the title for my new book.

My co-author Doug Murren and I have had front row (well… front section) seats in the development of evangelical Christianity over the past 45 years, most of them spent as pastors. Consequently we think we see patterns that explain why our current version of Christianity is uniquely welcoming to bullies and how to put a stop to it. That’s why the subtitle Why The Church Welcomes Bullies and How To Stop It will be prominently displayed. That’s the rational promise we’re making to thousands of religious people who have suffered in silence from religious abuse and feel alone. We are also hoping to “telegraph” a message to our non- religious friends who have watched Christians sit silently by as some of our leaders publicly abuse power and wonder why we allow them to get away with it.

But why the image…? Why not just title the book Question Mark.

(FWIW we do anticipate that QM will be the title people will enter when searching on Amazon or BN)

This is a very relevant and reasonable question, especially given my track record of book sales, which if nothing else has proven that a clever title does not a best seller make. I mean how cool is this title? – The Resignation of Eve what if Adams rib is no longer willing to be the church’s backbone? – that cleverly titled book probably sold fewer than 2000 copies. You know why? Pastors don’t feel threatened (yet) by the promise the book made. As clever as the title is, it’s not clever enough to overcome what James Davison Hunter refers to as “agency” or the role cultural elites play in determining what gets to market and who gets to “see” it.


The ? is clearly (if not cleverly) meant to link the most recent public soap opera involving a religious leader with the topic of religious abuse. Why?

This book was intentionally produced in 90 days so that it could address issues people are feeling in real time. As an author of non-fiction material I detest being told I have to wait 1-2 years for my thoughts to “go public”. The Internet has permanently disrupted that process. Consumers won’t wait because they don’t have to. Not only that, for more and more public thinkers and speakers, books will cease to be the first way people engage with your ideas. That will more likely happen via a blog, YouTube, podcast or even a small “house concert”. In the near future your “books” will be relevant “after” people sample you via another form of media. Your book will not be for people who want to “take a chance” on you but for people who are asking you to “tell me more”. In other words your book will become an adjunct to you rather than an introduction to you. That’s why I intend to produce “90 day books” a line of books that are produced as events transpire so that readers can get a deeper dive into the idea or issue they’re curious about from a person they like and trust. That’s the human process.

The current process we inherited locates that trust in an institution called a “publishing house” which determines that such and such author is worthy of their brand signaling that you can take a chance on them. Now the roles have been reversed. Whatever services publishers ultimately end up providing authors in terms of taking their ideas public are yet to be determined. Publishers that figure out why they should get a percentage of income for services rendered will survive the others will die.

This book was produced in 90 days because during that time the topic of religious bullying has been given historic levels of visibility through very public displays of hubris by Mark Driscoll. Without Driscoll this would be another “me too” book on spiritual abuse.

In our opinion, given the cultural relevance, to not associate the topic of religious bullying with Driscoll would be intellectually dishonest and pastorally irresponsible.

In our book we avail ourselves of the very public record of Driscolls’ fall into grace (our hopeful reframe for him). We are not reticent to call out his abusive patterns since anyone can access them the same way we did using Google. However our larger point is highlighted by the subtitle – the systemic reasons a young man like Driscoll made it to the very top levels of influence in modern day Christianity. Why didn’t his mentors spot his dysfunction earlier in his development? Why are other young men currently being groomed to take his place? Why is the church complicit? Why don’t religious people police themselves rather than waiting for “the world” to notice and then when they do, claim that we’re being persecuted or shooting our wounded?

These are the systemic issues we address but would have no audience for were it not for the actions of one very influential and very ill young man named mark.