I think I would like to see the 19 other comments before I comment - is there a way to view comments without commenting yourself? Here’s my URL http://mondaymorninginsight.com/index.php/site/comments/im_a_fan_of_keeping_the_church_small/ there doesn’t seem to be.

About keeping the church small - that’s interesting. I wonder why he says that? I can think of several reasons myself. I think it’s harder to achieve community in larger churches, so I can understand why you’d want to keep things small. I assume you’d have a greater community, higher accountability, greater investment in each others’ lives and hopefully greater spiritual growth - I wonder if that’s true.

Dave Browning is doing something interesting, where instead of growing up in one place, they grow outward and multiply a lot! It seems they are able to keep intimacy, authenticity, community at a maximum, while still reaching tens of thousands for Christ. I, personally, like this strategy, though I haven’t been a part of it.

Acts 2:41 - 41 So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.

Acts 4:4 But many of those who had heard the word believed, and the number of the men came to about five thousand.

I’m not sure Jesus was a huge fan of keeping the church small. It is understood that they met in homes on a regular basis, but it is also clear in scripture that everyone (the thousand) met to together for meetings. In Acts 6, we see the massive church addressing a major problem with Hellenistic Jewish widows. 7 spirt-filled men were selected to address this (and probably other problems). This was not a ‘house-church’ issue. This was a mega-church issue.

I believe it’s impossible to follow the guidelines of church discipline ( laid out in 1Corn. 5 among others ) in a large/mega church.  The accountability is lost when you can come and go without anyone knowing you when ever there.

I see large churches so focused on the money & numbers
( which go hand in hand), that they are willing for sacrifice what makes a church a church.

I think small vs. large is a false dichotomy.  It’s possible to have both in the same congregation.  Yes, it’s work, and yes, it’s impossible for one senior/lead pastor to know everyone intimately in that kind of arena.  But the fact remains, churches don’t have to give up their “smallness” in order to reach more people.

Why is it that small churches long to be big so they can have progams and the benefits of all it brings, and the large churches stress their small group ministry?  I could not find anything about the quote that would suggest that the writter does not believe in evangelism or reaching others for Christ, but that he prefers the intimacy found in a small gathering.  If the house church movement is true to its roots, it reaches others and then splits to reach more when the size is to large to meet in a home.  I have been in both large and small churches in my life, and have found God to be in both.

I think anyone with the ambition to grow a mega church should be forced to spend a month completely alone in a very remote prairie with mmm say 13,000 sheep so they will know what it is like to even attempt to shepherd that many.

On the home page of the Emanuel Lutheran website it says:
Our GROWING congregation is devoted to serving others through mission work in our own community as well as abroad. 
We believe that all members of our congregation have a valuable role to play if our mission OUTREACH is to continue and be successful!
This statement is in direct contradiction with their stated mission . . . unless they adopt the multi-church strategy or plant churches at a regular pace.  If 25% of the regular attenders reach one new person per year, by the 3rd year the church would have doubled to 400 people.

A church cannot stay small and grow at the same time, and growth is essential if we are going to evaluate church health in a biblical way.

Wendi

[It’s possible to have both in the same congregation.] That’s what they did in Acts, and that’s what we do with healthy small-group life (I hesitate to use the word ministry, since that’s not all it is...)

Jud, I’ve seen some megachurches with CEO-style pastors that weren’t cult-personality-driven. Not all are.

Also, Jud writes [I think anyone with the ambition to grow a mega church should be forced to spend a month completely alone in a very remote prairie with mmm say 13,000 sheep so they will know what it is like to even attempt to shepherd that many.] Except… that any healthy really big church has multiple people shepherding that flock, not just one, like the church in Acts did. We have just under 1000 in average weekend attendance, and we have 6 pastors. We need 6, and we don’t do all the ministry (We do precious little of it) as our people buy into the idea that they are more than the congregation, they are the CHURCH!

Alot of people are going to be ticked when they get to heaven and realize that it’s not a small group.  I’m just saying....

I was shocked when I talked to a “regular” at the last large church I attended and discovered he was a Zen Buddhist who loved the fact that the Jesus he found there could co-exist with his practice of Buddhism. It woke me out of the stupor I was in for sure. When you move away from preaching repentance and dull all the sharp edges the illusion of growth and progress are almost guaranteed.

Of course not all large churches have become dens of compromise and pragmatism. There are tremendous large churches.

My first response is “dude its not your church.”

My second response is well you can stay small and still grow in many ways.  Lots of churches have plans to grow and then plant another church.  Thats not a bad thing.  I don’t think that’s what he’s talking about though?