Church Health

10 Minutes After Church

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

What do you usually do immediately after your Sunday morning church service ends? If you’re like most of church-going humanity, you probably have a routine. Upon the final “Amen”, you arise from your regular spot and your body follows a subconscious script. You may go to the nursery to pick up a child, maybe you have your weekly chat about the high school sports team with the person seated in the row behind you, or perhaps you hightail it toward the coffee to snag a to-go cup on your way out the door.

There’s nothing wrong with being a creature of habit, but many of us have the same routine at the end of a church service as we do at the conclusion of a sporting event or any other public gathering. We gather our belongings, utter some niceties, and shuffle toward the exits. That’s a problem. More specifically, it’s a bad habit.

Since the church body is a family of brothers and sisters in Christ, the end of the formal part of a service is not the end of church but rather the beginning of a new segment of the family gathering. When the structured gathering ends, an indispensable aspect of Christian vitality and growth—fellowship—continues.

Don’t get the wrong idea. You don’t have to be an extrovert who seeks people out like a goldendoodle puppy to faithfully participate in the fellowship of the church. You just have to be intentional.

If you’re one of the many believers with a bad habit of neglecting the broader fellowship of the church after the service, here’s one simple suggestion: set apart ten minutes after the gathering concludes and devote that time to getting to know others in the church family. This is a ten-minute commitment to invest in your eternal faith family and show hospitality to those not yet in the family.

To help set these ten minutes apart, it may help to consider what not to do, in order to be free and available for fellowship with the body of Christ.

1. Don’t Talk to Your Besties

There’s nothing wrong with having close friends in the church (in fact, there’s much right about that), but the weekly gathering is the one time each week when all the people you don’t naturally bump into are gathered in one place. Don’t miss that opportunity to experience the fullness of the body of Christ by getting to know those who are unlike you or from different life stages and interests. Not only will you benefit from a more diverse fellowship, but over time the supernatural unity of the Spirit will be gloriously on display as members of a church family have genuine care and concern for those outside their immediate circles. Let your closest friends know that right after the service (and, ideally, before the service as well), your aim is to engage the larger fellowship of the church family. Maybe this will encourage them to do the same!

2. Don’t Talk to Blood

Similarly, in those first ten minutes after the service, skip the chit-chat with your family. This is not to denigrate your family. If you get to regularly attend church with your extended family, that is a gift from God to be cherished. But very often, one’s family becomes the relationally safe enclave that undermines more intentional branching out into the broader church family. If your habit is currently to huddle up with your family to chat after church, it’s time to replace that habit with a better one. You’ll talk to your family later, so in those first moments after the official time is done, reorient your family outward toward the broader fellowship of the church family.

3. Don’t Talk Shop

While circumstances will arise that need the attention of a staff member or ministry leader, the goal in the minutes prior to and following the service is to be freed up for fellowship. It’s common for those involved in the formal functions on a Sunday (music ministry, kids ministry, elders, deacons, staff, etc.) to ‘talk shop’ with others who are also involved in leading and serving. But again, this is the one time each week that the building is filled with the faith family! The shop talk can wait or be accomplished with an email. You might even need to politely tell a fellow ministry leader, “Let’s discuss this later. I want to go meet those people before they leave.” In doing so, you’re not only prioritizing what matters, you’re setting the tone for a culture in which all the ministry leaders are flock-oriented.

Habits are what we do without noticing. Most people are not actively trying to have shallow relationships with the church family. But without realizing it, many people are missing the gift of rich church fellowship due to unexamined Sunday habits. I encourage you to devote ten minutes after the service for conversing with others in the faith family—and soon you’ll likely find that ten minutes is not nearly enough. 

***

This post was written by Andy Huette, Senior Pastor of Christ Community Church in Gridley, Illinois, and orignally published by Mattthias Media. Here is the link to the original post: The Ten Minutes After Church Ends.

Check out: How to Walk into Church

Empty Pews: 10 Days When Church Attendance is Most Down

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

According to Thom Rainer‘s research, the 10 Sundays each year when church attendance is most noticably down are:

  1. Father’s Day.
  1. The Sunday after Thanksgiving day.
  1. Memorial Day weekend Sunday.
  1. Labor Day weekend Sunday.
  1. The Sundays before and after Christmas.
  1. The Sunday nearest the Fourth of July.
  1. The Sunday nearest to New Year’s Day.
  1. Time changes: spring forward.
  1. Spring and fall break Sundays.
  1. Summer Sundays, particularly in July.

Of course, as Rainer also points out, each church and every community has their own peculiarities. Younger congregations, especially in more affluent areas, are likely to be more effected by youth soccer and baseball/softball seasons. Some more rural congregations may see increased absensces during deer hunting season. When I was in college, I remember reading of a study that showed church attendance across Knxoville decreased signifcantly the day following a loss by the Tennessee Volunteers football team. When I surved as a pastor in Pittsburgh, we saw a dip in attendance on a Sunday the Steelers were playing in the Super Bowl – even thoiugh kickoff was not until 6:30 in the evening! And, of course, there are always the weather factors…

Certainly there are a number of plausible reasons that might hinder or prevent even the most ardent church-goers from participating in corporate worship on any given Lord’s Day. Still, the urging from the author if the Book of Hebrews rings out:

“Let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, not neglecting meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.” (Hebrews 10.24-25)

12 Rules For Promoting Harmony Among Church Members

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Thomas Smyth, long-time pastor of Second Presbyterian Church in Charleston, South Carolina, during the 19th Century, gave several practical directions in a manual for the members of his congregation (found in Volume 5 of his Complete Works).

The following are twelve rules for promoting harmony among church members. These appear to have been taken out of William Plumer‘s Manual for Church Members. I have taken the liberty to contemporize some of the language, believing these timeless premises are things every church needs to hear and to be periodically reminded:

1. Remember that we are all subject to failings and infirmities, of one kind or another. (Matthew 7.1-5, Romans 2.21-23)

2. Bear with each other, and do not magnify each other’s weaknesses and short-comings. (Galatians 6.1)

3. Pray for one another when we are gathered together; and even more particularly when we are by ourselves, alone, and in private. (James 5.16)

4. Avoid going from house to house, for the purpose of hearing “news” (i.e. “gossip”), and [avoid] interfering with other people’s business. (Leviticus 19.16)

5. Always to turn a deaf ear to any slanderous report, and allow no accusation to be brought against any person unless and until it is well-founded AND proved. (Proverbs 25.23)

6. If another church member is at fault, tell him/her of it in private, before it is mentioned to others. (Matthew 18.15)

7. Watch against avoiding one another (after some seeming offense or awkward encounter) and put the best interpretation on any action that could appear as opposition or [that could] cause resentment. (Proverbs 10.12)

8. Observe the just rule of Solomon: that is: to… “leave off contention before it is meddled with”. (Prov. 17.14)

9. If a member has offended, consider how glorious, how God-like it is to forgive, and how unlike a Christian it is to seek revenge – or even to hold a grudge. (Ephesians 4.2)

10. Remember that it is always a grand strategy of the Devil to promote distance and animosity among members of Churches. We should, therefore, watch against everything that furthers his end. (James 3.16)

11. Consider how much more good we can do in the world at large, and in the Church in particular, when we are all united in love, than we can do when acting alone, and indulging a contrary spirit. (John 13.35)

12. Lastly, consider the express injunction of Scripture, and the beautiful example of Christ, as to the importance of things. (Ephesians 4.32, 1 Peter 2.21, John13.5, 35)

Original Source: Log College Press Blog

For further reading on this topic, check out Love Or Die: Christ’s Wakeup Call to the Church by Alexander Strauch

4 Questions Worth Exploring

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

In this short video (8 minutes), Tim Keller offers four questions he would like to see his denomination (which is also my denomination) – the Presbyterian Church in America – explore in the coming years.

The four questions are:

  1. How do we create a culture in which pastors pray like they should?
  2. How do we deal with controversy in a social media age?
  3. How do we form our kids – and disciples in general – in a digital age?
  4. How do we get Christians to engage in evangelism?

These questions are worthwhile, not only for a denomination to explore, but also for any local congregation to think about and discuss.

Marks of Revival

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Revival Fires

I had the privilege last week to meet a man convinced we are headed for revival.  He is a gentle man, who thinks often of God, wishing for a return to some semblance of the way things used to be – minus the overt sins of racism and sexism that were so widely tolerated in days gone by.  But the basic reason for his certainty is simple: We are in desperate need of revival. He had other reasons, of course; supporting reasons. Among them, through his examination of of history he has concluded that God works cyclically, and that we are presently overdue for the next revival.

I share his desire to see God bring revival.  I can’t argue that we are overdue and in desperate need. And it is not just America that needs to be “revived”.  More than our culture, I believe the American Church needs to experience revival.  And when God works, he works through his church. So if revival is to occur, reorienting the cultural drift, renewing God as the rightful object of our collective affection, it is going to be at work in and through the Church.

But still, what does revival actually mean? Of course it means “to make alive”.  But what does it look like? Do all revivals look alike? What are the characteristics?

I suspect the answer the the question “Do all revivals look alike?” is likely a “No”.  Cultures are different. God seems to bless different expressions of evangelism and ministry approaches from one generation to the next; one culture to the next.  So to assume when revivals hit they will be uniform seems a bit of a stretch to me.

J.I. Packer,defines a revival this way:

“Revival is God accelerating, intensifying, and extending the work of grace that goes on in every Christian’s life!”

In his book God in our Midst, Packer suggests that, among the variety of God’s ways, there are at least five constants that seem to always appear in biblical revivals:

1. Awareness of God’s presence: “The first and fundamental feature in renewal is the sense that God has drawn awesomely near in his holiness, mercy and might.”

2. Responsiveness to God’s Word: “The message of Scripture which previously was making only a superficial impact, if that, now searches its hearers and readers to the depth of their being.”

3. Sensitiveness to (Our Own) Sin: “Consciences become tender and a profound humbling takes place.”

4. Liveliness in Community: “Love and generosity, unity and joy, assurance and boldness, a spirit of praise and prayer, and a passion to reach out to win others, are recurring marks of renewed communities.”

5. Fruitfulness in Testimony: “Christians proclaim by word and deed the power of the new life, souls are won, and a community conscience informed by Christian values emerges.”

I hope my new friend is right, that God – who is always at work – will soon be at work in unusual ways.  These are some of the signs I will pray will be evident in our culture, and in our church.

Illustration of a Healthy Church

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment
Church on Mission

If our congregation were to be a church with the gospel, plus a group that enjoys being together in community, but we were not on mission to reach out to our neighbors and the Nations, for the sake of advancing Christ’s Kingdom, then we would just be another social club for people to attend.

Gospel + Community – Mission = Club

If we were to be a church with the gospel, and we were actively engaged in mission to our neighbors, but not together in community, then we would  be like a bunch of silos that aren’t truly showing off the body of Christ. We could not be considered like a city on a hill.

Gospel + Mission – Community = Para-Church

If we were to become a church actively on mission, serving together in community with one another, but we had no gospel, or we were careless about the truths of the gospel, we would then merely be just another non-profit organization.

Community + Mission – Gospel = Non Profit

To be the church, to be what Jesus calls us to be, what he created us to be, is a Gospel-centered, missional, gathering of people living life together, sharing one another’s joys and pains, serving together in various ways for the good of our city, expecting nothing in return, all for the glory of Jesus, the joy of being together, and love for our neighbors.

We must be a church that is gospel centered, on mission in community so that we can be the organism, the family, the church that Christ gave the Spirit to empower, and of which he said could not be stopped. (Matthew 16.13-18)

Gospel + Community + Mission = Church

Authentic Church: Road to a Re-newed Reality

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Celtic Transformation

I have been mulling on something the late Francis Schaeffer said:

“There are four things which are absolutely necessary if we as Christians are going to meet the need of our age and the overwhelming pressure we are increasingly facing.”

No doubt that the Church, in our culture as well as other cultures, faces increasing and overwhelming pressure.  Pressure to cave. Pressure to capitulate. Pressure to compromise.  These pressures come from both  subtle and overt threats from the culture and from the government, as George Orwell predicted in his classic 1984.  Perhaps even more devastating is the subversive seductive pressure. The craving of the church to be “relevant”, to fit in, to be liked, so people will come in great numbers, so we can be considered successful, has seemingly replaced a commitment to faithfulness and fruitfulness.  This mindset seems in line with Aldous Huxley‘s “nightmarish vision of the future” in his opus Brave New World.  And while there is certainly nothing wrong with a desire to be liked, nor to see our churches full, these consuming desires are antithetical to the teachings of Jesus, and consequently, I fear, resulting in an increasingly impotent Church.

So what are Schaeffer’s four things?

Schaeffer labeled them Two Contents and Two Realities.

Continue reading →

Chrysalis Factor

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Chrysalis

There are times I feel somewhat like a sea captain who took charge of a ship that had experienced unprecedented prosperity under the direction of his predecessor, and then sprung a leak a few months into his tenure.  Don’t get me wrong, I love the church where I serve, but some of the challenges came as a bit of a surprise.  Chiefly a decline in attendance and a corresponding budgetary strain.

In some ways this was inevitable. In some ways this is circumstantial. And in other ways it is personal.

It was inevitable because nothing stays the same forever. No organization, or organism, experiences perpetual increase in prosperity.  Sooner or later, changes, challenges, and a period of decline is certain.

It is circumstantial, if for no other reason, the nature of the community where our church is located is a very fluid, very transient community, Many who live here are in the military, and so they are only here for a short time. Others who live here have retired – often early – and come to enjoy the wealth of cultural, historical, and natural amenities. However, there seems to be a pattern – when one member of the marriage, husband or wife, experience injury or become ill, the couple moves away, back home, or somewhere near their children.  Understandable. While Williamsburg is a beautiful place to settle, they have no roots here, so they move on.

It is personal in the sense that whenever a church changes pastors there is almost always some turnover among the members.  No matter how capable the new minister is, his presence is a constant reminder that things have changed; that this is not exactly the church that they had joined anymore.  And as American church culture becomes increasingly more consumeristic, the less likely folks are to stick around to get used to the changes.  After all, if they have to adjust to change, why not use it as an opportunity to trade in for a new model that has some amenities that they had not been looking for a few years ago, but would provide a pleasant upgrade.  Consequently new pastors are often not treated like people, who might have feelings, but rather as a commodity to be embraced or discarded at the whim of the customer.  Or another aspect of the personal – some church members just don’t like the new pastor’s personality (or lack of it).

I suspect differing measures of all three of these played a part in our initial decline.  Fortunately we remained stable. We have a good cohesive staff; wise and godly officers who work as a team, a band of brothers; and no panic or finger pointing from the congregation.  So despite our leak our ship has remained in pretty good shape.

As we move forward it is essential to assess where we are, and to map out where we are headed.

At present we are in what Thom Rainer calls the Chrysalis Period.  According to Rainer, during the Chrysalis Period a church or organization undergoes changes beneath the surface that are necessary to become what we will inevitably become.

The chrysalis is the pupa of a butterfly encased in a cocoon. It is the former caterpillar and the future butterfly. It is the stage when the worm-like, slow-moving caterpillar becomes a beautiful, free-flying butterfly.

I like the imagery.  It seems apt.  We are a work in process.  And not all that is going on is evident to all who take a look.

Bounded-Set vs Centered-Set

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Bounded-vs-Centered-Set

Some time back I posted a piece titled Numbering Those On the Ranch, exploring the concept of what missiologist Alan Hirsch refers to as a “centered-set” metric for evaluating a church.  More recently I stumbled across a post by Bob Thune, of Coram Deo Church in Omaha, explaining his understanding of Centered-Set verses the more traditional Bounded-Set metric. I appreciated what Thune had to say, so I wanted to post it, even if primarily for my own benefit, as a resource for future use.

***

There are two ways of thinking about social groupings: centered-set and bounded-set. These terms come to us from the field of mathematics (set theory). In recent years they’ve been applied more broadly by sociologists and missiologists. The fountainhead of most of this thinking in the Christian church was Paul Hiebert, a missiologist at Fuller Seminary.

Hiebert suggested that our minds categorize people according to either “bounded set” or “centered set” thinking:

Bounded Sets

  • … are formed by defining the boundaries – the essential qualities which separate something inside the set from something outside. Heibert’s classic example is “apples.” Either a fruit is an apple, or it isn’t.
  • Maintaining the boundary is crucial to maintaining the category.
  • Bounded sets are static sets – they don’t change, they only add or lose members.
  • The important thing is to “cross the boundary” to be part of the set.

Centered Sets

  • … are formed by defining a center. The set is made up of all objects moving toward that center. As an everyday example: “bald men.”
  • While a centered set does not focus on the boundary, a boundary does indeed exist. The boundary is clear so long as the center is clear.
  • The objects within a centered set are not categorically uniform. Some may be near the center and others far from it, even though all are moving towards the center.

Hiebert asserts that Americans tend to think almost exclusively in bounded-set categories. And this affects our understanding of Christian discipleship. We tend to “stress evangelism as the major task — getting people into the category. Moreover, we… see conversion as a single dramatic event — crossing the boundary between being a ‘non-Christian’ and being a ‘Christian’” (Hiebert, 1978).

Hiebert argues instead for a “centered-set” way of thinking about Christian conversion:

A Christian would be defined in terms of a center—in terms of who is God. The critical question is, to whom does the person offer his worship and allegiance? …Two important dynamics are recognized. First there is conversion, which in a centered set means that the person has turned around. He has left another center or god and has made Christ his center. This is a definite event—a change in the God in whom he places his faith. But, by definition, growth is an equally essential part of being a Christian. Having turned around, one must continue to move towards the center. There is no static state. Conversion is not the end, it is the beginning. We need evangelism to bring people to Christ, but we must also think about the rest of their lives. We must think in terms of bringing them to Christian maturity in terms of their knowledge of Christ and their growth in Christlikeness.

Theologically, I find some aspects of Hiebert’s argument poorly nuanced. He would do well to differentiate regeneration (the invisible, immediate work of the Holy Spirit on the soul, which is in fact a decisive event) from conversion (our experience of that event, which often feels more like a “process” than like a decisive moment). Those who have applied Hiebert’s set theory to individual salvation (Brian McLaren, for instance) have tended to drift in fuzzy doctrinal directions.

But I find Hiebert’s insights immensely helpful when applied to ecclesiology. This is where I first encountered the set-theory rubric, as applied by Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost in their 2003 book The Shaping of Things to Come. Frost and Hirsch argued for viewing the church as a centered set rather than a bounded set. Why not build a church by defining the center rather than patrolling the boundaries? Why not place the gospel of Jesus Christ at the center of the church’s life and practice, inviting everyone to reorient their lives around Him? In this way, we continually invite Christians into deeper and deeper discipleship, while also inviting non-Christians to deal with the claims of Jesus on their lives. As Hiebert himself acknowledges, this does not mean there is no boundary; there is just “less need to play boundary games and to institutionally exclude those who are not truly Christian. Rather, the focus is on the center and pointing people to that center” (Hiebert, 1978).

It is my personal conviction that: a) this is what the New Testament church did (see, for example, Galatians 1:6-9; Colossians 1:6; Romans 1:13-15); b) this is what it truly means to be a “gospel-centered” church; and c) this is the only way to have a truly missional church, where non-Christians are treated with true Christian hospitality AND are regularly being converted to faith in Jesus.

In Spirit Produced Corporateness

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Naval Academy Rowing Team

As I reflect upon the need of our church to constantly cultivate community among those within our congregation, as well as between those already part of the congregation and those who have newly arrived, I am pondering the poignancy of this statement by Stanley Grenz, from his book Theology for the Community of God:

“Only in our Spirit-produced corporateness do we truly reflect to all creation the grand dynamic that lies at the heart of the triune God. As we share together in the Holy Spirit, therefore, we participate in relationship with the living God and become the community of Christ our Lord.”

Ministry Diagnosis Questions

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Country Doctor

As a pastor it is not only requisite to be a student of God’s Word, but it is also essential to be a student of the people to whom I preach and teach.  This is true for any church or ministry leader.  If we do not know the Bible, and sound doctrine, we have nothing to offer. But even if we have voluminous knowledge, if we do not know the people with whom we are called to share these truths, then we will not know how to apply these truths.  It would be as ineffective as a medic possessing all the medicines but without enough biological understanding to make a valid diagnosis.

In a recent post, 9 Questions for Ministry Leaders, Paul Tripp identifies nine helpful questions to ask ourselves, and to discuss with the other leaders in our churches or ministries, as we attempt to become effective students and exegetes of our people:

  1. What are the cultural idols that are particularly attractive to my people?
  2. Where do they tend to buy into an unbiblical worldview with its accompanying hopes and dreams?
  3. Are there themes of spiritual struggle that I need to speak to?
  4. Where do they tend to get discouraged and need the hope of the gospel?
  5. What is the level of their biblical literacy and theological knowledge?
  6. How many of them are actively involved in service, and how many are “ecclesiastical consumers”?
  7. What do they tend to struggle with in the workplace?
  8. What do they wrestle with at home?
  9. What are they reading, watching, and listening to, and how are they influenced by it?

To Stop It or Not to Stop It, That is a Question

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Street Lights at Night

The ministry web site, ChurchLeaders.com, reported news of an unfortunate event in Colorado, and then asked the provocative rhetorical question: “How would you have handled it?” After a little thought I decided I would take a stab at taking the question, taking it beyond the mere rhetorical, and actually trying to answer it – albeit purely hypothetically.

Here’s the situation:

Pastors of a church in Lakewood, Colo., halted a funeral service in their church for a lesbian woman on Saturday, January 10, because the tribute video the family prepared showed photos of the woman kissing her partner. Fifteen minutes after the service was to begin, lead the pastor canceled the event when organizers would not edit the footage out of the video. Mourners, which numbered more than 150, then re-loaded the casket into the hearse, gathered the flowers and proceeded across the street to a mortuary, where the service continued.

Whether this account gives sufficient accurate details, I do not know. Assuming that it does, I still think I would have reacted differently than the pastor of the church.  But lingering questions also make my response conditional.

First, I would want to know if the deceased woman was a member of the congregation or not.  It would make a difference.  I am assuming that she was not, since there is no mention of any connection with the church. And what is stated would seem to suggest she was not; that this was simply a business arrangement the church had with the local funeral home.

New Hope Ministries was chosen for the memorial service because of its location – close to where Collier and her friends grew up, friends said.

So my first thought is that, to the degree it us up to me, I would not likely have voted to approve the service at our church in the first place.  However, since the service had been approved, I am uncomfortable with the decision of the pastor to stop the service in progress.

Someone might be curious as to why I would not have voted to approve the service in the first place.  Perhaps there may even be an assumption of my motives – whether one would be inclined to agree with or chafe at those presumed motives.  But my answer is in one sense simpler, and in another more complex, than might be assumed.

I would not have voted to approve the service, not because of the sexual orientation of the individual, but simply because it would require an unusual circumstance for me to vote to use the church building for a service for someone with no connection with the church.  I would not say never, but rarely – and only with very good reason.  This is both a practical and communal issue.  Practically, funerals and weddings take a lot of manpower.  I would prefer to respect the time demands upon the deacons of our church, and our other volunteers, and not embrace a service for mere commercial reasons.  If, however, it is someone who is part of the church family, well then I think every reasonable effort ought to be made to honor the person and support the family.

Would sexual orientation have any effect on my decision?  No, not really. At least not to do what the pastor in this situation reportedly did.

Continue reading →

Three Times a Month

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Abstract Trinity (Dumitru Verdianu)

Thom Rainer recently noted that there has been a marked change in the measure of comitment the average Christian had to his or her church. At least there has been a change in one measurable detail:

An active church member 15 years ago attended church three times a week. Now it’s three times a month

I do not know if this is an accurate assessment from some of Rainer’s research, or if this is more of an anecdotal hyberbole reflecting an evident trend. Regardless, I suspect that it is not far off base.

I also suspect there are some reasons. Among them would seem:

  • Baby Boomers Reaching Retirment Age
  • Rise of Churchless Christianity

Is Bigger Really Better?

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Big Fish Small Pond, Small Fish Big Pond

No matter how much I have grown to despise the discussion, it seems I cannot avoid it entirely.  Almost any conversation about church, it seems, inevitably gravitates in some form toward the Bigger is Better or Great Things Come in Small Packages debate.

It is not always an actual debate. In fact it is probably more often than not simply an expression of personal preference. But I have come to loathe the whole subject, having come to believe that the comparisons are largely irrelevant. There are some great large churches, and there are some great small churches; There are some horrendous large churches, and there are some pathetic small churches. And there are good and bad churches of all sizes in between.  The issue is not which size is best, but rather: Is your particular church – and my particular church – healthy, God-honoring, and fruitful?

That said, and with no desire to encourage debate, I found an observation by Neil Cole to be interesting:

There are millions of people in smaller congregations across the country who live with a feeling that they are failures because their church isn’t as big as the megaplex congregation down the street. This is sad and should not be the case.

A global survey conducted by Christian Schwartz found that smaller churches consistently scored higher than large churches in seven out of eight qualitative characteristics of a healthy church. A more recent study of churches in America, conducted by Ed Stetzer and Life Way Research, revealed that churches of two hundred or less are four times more likely to plant a daughter church than churches of one thousand or more. The research seems to even indicate that the pattern continues—the smaller the size of the church the more fertile they are in planting churches.

It pains me that so many churches and leaders suffer from an inferiority complex when in fact they could very well be more healthy and fruitful than the big-box church down the street.

I am not suggesting that the mega church is something we need to end, I am simply saying that we need other kinds of churches to truly transform our world. I also do not want people in huge churches to think that just because they have more people and more money that they are more blessed by God. The stats tell us that ten smaller churches of 100 people will accomplish much more than one church of 1000.

Read the rest of  Cole’s article: Is Bigger Really Better?

And again, while not wanting to prompt debate, I do welcome any comments about Cole’s observations.