Small Churches: The Advantages
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Tue, November 01, 2005
- Viewed 53
- (20) comments so far
Second, in a smaller church there can be a greater awareness of needs. Since the members know each other, those who face medical, economic, mental, or spiritual needs are known and have the help and sympathy of others. It isn?t always true, of course, but the response to a need can come more quickly from a smaller group that identifies itself as ?family.?
Third, in a smaller church the ministers can truly shepherd the sheep. Although I?ve never thought it was the minister?s responsibility alone to call, counsel, or shepherd, there is a sense of closeness that develops between the committed shepherd and the congregation. The minister almost becomes a ?father? figure and has far more direct contact with his flock than the senior minister in a mega-church. In a mega-church, one of the members asked the caller who had come to see them in the hospital when the senior minister was going to come see them. The caller responded, ?You don?t want to be that sick.? And so it goes!
Fourth, in a smaller church there is a stronger sense of tradition. Tradition can be either good or bad, but when it is good it binds together people better than slick programs or beautiful structures. Traditions create loyalties and identifications that can be positive and helpful.
Fifth, in a smaller church there is a strong sense of identity. Of course, that identity can sometimes degenerate into a prejudice against those ?ho aren?t like us.? Nonetheless, there are positive benefits for gathering people together who come from similar backgrounds, interests, and occupations.
Sixth, in a smaller church there is a greater tolerance with those who make an effort. Aunt Mary may not be the most accomplished pianist in the world, but she tries hard and hits most of the notes so she is loved and accepted. Besides, she may be the only one who can even play. Professional quality is not often available in the smaller church, but loving acceptance for those who make the effort is.
Your thoughts? (Remember... part two is tomorrow!)
Michael Hines has an interesting post on the advantage and disadvantages of small churches on his blog (The Discipler). Since I’m often accused (by a very small group of people) to be pro-mega-church and anti-small church; (which I’m not, by the way); I thought this would be a great discussion topic here. Today, we’ll look at what Michael says are some real advantages of small churches. Tomorrow, we’ll look at some of the disadvantages... Michael writes…
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
J. R. Miller on Tue, November 01, 2005
Hmmm… small church… small response. I wonder why the mega-church articles get all the responses?
http://www.emerginglife.org
Dean on Tue, November 01, 2005
What is this fixation with size on either end of the spectrum? I suspect that it is largely an American peculiarity to describe one’s church as size first and nature second. When I ask someone to tell me about their congregation, I could care less how many people sit in seats there at any given event. I want to know their character, their spirit, their heart, their mindset. But when’s the last time you asked someone about their church that they started by describing the people instead of the attendance and programs, etc. Is anybody else out there noticing the basis on which the vitality of the church is measured is primarly size? So what! A crowd can be on track as well as a compact company of Christians and the reverse is also true. Can we please do something together to change the starting point of the conversation about the vitality of the church? The size and style and structure aren’t going to change the spiritual culture and climate around us, but a clear contrast between the kingdoms of the world and the Kingdom of our Lord and Savior will. When we begin to intentionally choose simplicity of possessions for the joy of sharing with those in need instead of getting bigger houses and transportation devices and tech toys, I am convinced that the kingdom of this world will begin to take us seriously. Until then, all the affluent mega complexes and well-heeled professional priesthood in the world won’t do spit to advance the true Kingdom of Jesus. Again, can we scrap the size comparisons, please. It’s not helping to renew, reform or invigorate the Kingdom of Jesus at all.
Todd Rhoades on Tue, November 01, 2005
Wow. Thanks, Dean. That’s a real kick in the pants.
I get complaints that I’m not balanced. ‘He only favors the mega-churches’, they say.
‘No one ever talks about the smaller churches.’
So I go out of my way…
Oh well,
Sigh.
Nice rant though, Dean… I give it a B-.
Todd
Bernie Dehler on Tue, November 01, 2005
Here’s a question for Dean-
Should you aim for a small, medium, or large church? Suppose you are very successful with your ministry. Some will plant new churches, so they will always have a small or medium church. Some will rebuild and make a mega-church. Which option would you do? You have to do something, because you’re growing numerically, and can’t fit in the same building. You have to deal with the numbers. What would you do and why?
bigwhitehat on Tue, November 01, 2005
My church just shrank. 2200 to 200.
All my freinds are gone. I can’t resist the oppurtunity to build up on evangelism alone.
Todd Rhoades on Tue, November 01, 2005
Thanks, Bernie… I was dyin’ out here.
(Who woulda thunk that Bernie would throw a lifelife to me on the small church/large church issue?!)
http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif
Bernie brings up a point.. not sure it’s exactly what this post is totally about… but as a church grows it has to do something:
1. Start a new church
2. Build a bigger church
3. Start another site
I know each of us has preferences; and I think each could be valid for different reasons in different scenarios/communities.
Thanks, Bernie!
Todd
chip on Tue, November 01, 2005
I pastor a small church and just wrote about one benfit of a smaller church.
http://chipsanders.blogspot.com/
Community is a huge part of our church life. We eat together all the time. Many of our members are actively involved in each others lives outside of church. I hear stories all the time of how different people in the church have helped each other out. I hear about it after the fact which to me means the community is authentic. This is certainly possible in a large church. Sometimes this doesn’t happen when people get so involved with the programs of the church that they don’t have a whole lot of time outside of the church to interact with each other. And in some churchs I have been a part of I saw these same people so much at church that I didn’t want to see them outside of church.
Maybe that’s beside the point. But small churchs have a lot of things to offer people. So do large churchs.
Al on Tue, November 01, 2005
I believe there is a crisis in the small church in America today. These places have succumbed to tickling the ears of a few worshippers telling them what they want to hear so they won’t leave. They devote themselves to the creation of programs that only tend to feed the “sleeping.” Their potlucks are a clear attempt to cater to the whims and wants of people who would rather be fed food then the truth of God’s Word. These churches continue to band together for “revival” events that are nothing more then preaching, if you can call it that, to the choir. More, they congregate in small homes, to escape the World, while indulging themselves in pastries and coffee. The leadership is always talking to them, finding out what they “really” need and then bend all the rules of the Truth to give them what they want. You will find them coming to church in fancy cars and wearing fancy dresses like they owned the place. And heaven forbid that the “big giver” in the church gets upset, you will find the congregation pleading with the “injured” party to stay, giving him or her what ever they want in return, which is usually Power. Oh and lets not forget the youth and children’s departments, run by people who would rather give into the whining of the children, so the rooms are filled with games and TV’s and anything else that will keep them quiet for an hour, with the Word of God left on the shelf to gather dust. It is here also you will find makeshift “play equipment” to get the neighborhood kids to join up with the church, an obvious attempt appeal to their sinful “fun nature.”
Oh and let’s not forget the pastors or “Sheppard” as they like to call themselves. Generally they are obese men with not much going for them but the ability to schmooze with the “power” base, to insure his salary. Yes these “men of the cloth” pride themselves on their superior knowledge and flaunt their wears every Sunday morning, complementing sister so and so from the platform and praising brother such and such for his work on the flower bed. What they don’t tell you is that brother such and such and sister so and so run the board who in fact pays his salary and bakes him apple pies! Reminds me of the church of Laodicia who was neither hot nor cold, lukewarm they are I tell ya! Clouds without water, born of the evil one and destined to an eternity of flames!
Yes, the small church in America is in a crisis
Dean on Tue, November 01, 2005
Hi Todd
Sorry it took so long for me to get back and read the responses. I had to do my real job. http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif
Sorry for making you sigh. I know you wanted to balance things out. And you’re right; I was ranting. http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif
I really think the questions is not whether large, medium or small assemblies are healthy or unhealthy. The question should be whether the Body in a region, nation and around the world is healthy or not.
The point again… What is this fixation on size in the first place? I don’t see any point to that debate. Let’s talk about lifestyle, character and transformational influence that should stand in stark contrast to the rampant materialistic and humanistic mindset of the dominant culture. This seems to be prevalent both in and outside of the organizations making the claim to represent and have the heart and mind of a sacrificial Savior.
Let’s shift the debate from our size to our level of sacrifice, from our style to our substance, from our methodology to our similarity to the life of the Master. If we are followers of Jesus, doesn’t it make sense that our lives would at least look more like someone who didn’t even have a place to lay His head.
I’ve attended many large assemblies in the past several years and they always have a very good package put together. But the thing that never ceases to puzzle me is the absence of persons from the lower rungs of culture and economy in every one of those groups. Why is the mega church thing so popular to middle/upper class people but foreign to the poor? Something just doesn’t seem right about that for some reason.
Back to my assertion that we can evaluate the health of the church in a region or country or around the world… If you ask me (and you didn’t, but I’m going to state my case anyway) unless the poor experience the gospel (good news), it may be a good production, but it ain’t the gospel yet.
Jesus told the representatives from John the Baptizer to report that the gospel was being preached to the poor. Paul urged the church to give to the poor, not to hoard and build bigger barns. James deals with this issue as the litmus test of true faith.
The biggest uneasiness I have with the popularity of the mega complexes and their chief executives is that this is not what it’s meant to be about. The crowds are coming, but just what are they finding? They are finding the same thing that economically successful people in the world are promoting with a big Jesus twist thrown in for good luck.
I believe that the American church is blind people leading blind people and its the success and prosperity people are leading the procession. So much for my two dollars worth. http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif Maybe I should have spent that where there are ears to hear.
Thanks for posting my comments though. My hope is that together we will reflect a gospel that embraces those on the lower rungs of our culture and economy, but I suspect that will only happen when the wealthy in the “church” curb their appetite for accumulation of both popularity and possessions.
Dean on Tue, November 01, 2005
And for Bernie
What would I do in the scenario you mentioned? Thanks for making me accountable. A few years ago, I would have said, “Build it bigger.” These days, I’d say, “Make sure it looks like Jesus.” That seems to indicate intentional communities, smaller in size, deeper in spirit, sharper in mission and sacrificial by nature. Hope that provides a snapshot of my thinking on size in general.
JCE on Tue, November 01, 2005
I hope I am not offending by writing here again. I had said I would honor what I perceived as a request to cease from writing because of what was taken as a bias on my part against the Mega-Church world. However, I just want to share very briefly that I am having a transformational experience through all of the challenging discussion about these issues and wanted to thank you Todd for braving the waters of a very imbittered arena.
I think I am leaning toward believing there may not really even be such a thing as a small Church or a large Church. I’m beginning to sense that Church by the very nature of it being a relationship oriented WHO as opposed to a WHAT, and from the only perspective of reality that matters (His reality) a living connection that only exists as a visible expression when the WHO that is the Church are actually experiencing His presence in their midst, and the impossibility that their even exists anyone in the Church anywhere at any time that is not a truly born from above follower of Jesus, the Church wherever she finds herself is always and at all times HUGE and at the same time as SMALL as the right now moment being experienced together in His presence.
So, even a Mega-Church so to speak, at best is really just a whole bunch of small Church experiences, providing those experiences are actually happening, and a small Church is still and always will be however large the Body of Christ as a whole becomes. Any way you look at it that is pretty MEGA I’d say.
so, unless we are not really under one Lord, and one Body, of one Faith and one Spirit, we are all a LITTLE BIG CHURCH!
Elementary and shallow I know but safe water to walk in.
ld on Tue, November 01, 2005
I don’t think it’s a matter of what you do in as a small church or a large chuch. What does matter is your every day walk and where or with who you plant your seeds. I read somewhere that a shoe salesman witnessed to Billy Graham and no one asked what type of chuch he, {the shoe salesman}, belonged to. God knows His plans and as He doesn’t see as men see, who are we to say? LD
Pastor Proseus on Wed, November 02, 2005
As the pastor of a small church I resent the sterotypicial image painted earlier by a mega church maniac. We pastors of small flocks are not all fat, even though I am fluffy. My good friend and fellow laborer of another small church weighs little more than a tooth pick. My buddy and me do not pander to the power base because we do not have one. We have small congregations of blue collar workers that have been rejected by mega churches. We enjoy being a church full of rejects thank you very much. In our churches there is a sence of family. For those who are widowed, those who are not all polished and professional, those who are too timid, those who are illiterate, those who are too old, those who are bed ridden with illness and those who are despised and rejected of men there is a place to serve - a place to matter and make a difference. Why is that such a bad thing? We have potlucks and we enjoy fellowshipping at these times. I did read somwhere that Jesus often sat down with the boys of His ministry and had enjoyed a meal or two. Did not seem to me as He was pandering to anyone at these times. Yes we do compliment those who do something nice around the church because there are so few of them. Everybody should get a pat on the back for a job well done. I also read somewhere that Jesus says something to the effect well done thou good and faithfull servant. To some of the members of His flock. Do you suppose He was working the crowd? It makes me nuts when people stress quantity over quality on anything, but especially a church. Yeah I’d like to try being a mega church pastor for a day, but I’m afraid that I would miss that incredable sence of connectivity to what I’m really called to do to finish that day out.
Peter Hamm on Wed, November 02, 2005
JCE! Not elementary. Not shallow! AMEN!
I just moved earlier this year from serving on a volunteer basis in a tiny church to being one of five paid pastors in a church of just under 1000 members. So Here’s my perspective so far…
First, in a smaller church you get to know everybody.
True, but in a larger church, if you lead you need to get to know all the leaders. Small group experiences can facilitate keeping the big church “small”.
Second, in a smaller church there can be a greater awareness of needs.
I disagree. In our bigger church (in a not-so-wealthy area) we have a GREAT understanding of the needs of the individuals and of the community, because we WORK at that.
Third, in a smaller church the ministers can truly shepherd the sheep.
This is true if you take the “traditional American” definition of a pastor. In a larger church, though, if you equip the people to be the ministers (I am a pastor, not a minister… look again at Ephesians 4f:11-13) then any size church can minister to its own through its ministers/people. (Remember the priesthood of all believers?) Sorry, I’ve been reading too much Sue Mallory.
Fourth, in a smaller church there is a stronger sense of tradition.
So true. No argument there.
Fifth, in a smaller church there is a strong sense of identity.
I’ve been in churches of 60, 300, and 1000. The sense of identity in my experience has nothing to do with size.
Sixth, in a smaller church there is a greater tolerance with those who make an effort.
This is absolutely true!
Al on Wed, November 02, 2005
Hi Pastor Proseus,
I too have been the pastor of a small church. I understand full well the challenges and blessings of such a place.
My former comments were to, in a sense, turn the tables on those who decry the “large church” and how they “tickle the ears” of everyone to get them to come.” I wanted to show how one can look at the small church and make similar claims.
You see we all can judge a situation or different church based on our biases, which can have little to do with fact and much to do with perception.
It would be nice if we all allowed each church to be what God intended for that church to be! If small then small, if large then large, why do we have to rate something based on size or numbers? Sounds a little like when we were kids and use to say, “my dad is bigger then yours,” NO, “my dad is bigger then yours…” A bit childish don’t you think?
All the best no matter what size your church is!
Pastor Al
Page 1 of 2 pages 1 2 >
Post a Comment