Hmmm… small church… small response.  I wonder why the mega-church articles get all the responses?

http://www.emerginglife.org

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

My church just shrank.  2200 to 200. 

All my freinds are gone.  I can’t resist the oppurtunity to build up on evangelism alone.

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.

Hi Todd

Sorry it took so long for me to get back and read the responses.  I had to do my real job.

Sorry for making you sigh.  I know you wanted to balance things out.  And you’re right; I was ranting. 

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. 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.

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.

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.

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

I once read taht 90% of churches in the USA are less than 50-75 people.  Considering those mega churches with over 5-10,000 members I can agree with the statements printed in November/05.  I have a very small pioneer work, and I lead worship, play keyboard/guitar and preach [as pastor].  Visitors call and want a small church, but since we meet in our home, there is a ‘subbing’ of the site.  There are too many, as a friend of mine once quoted “"kangaroo Christians"” jumping from one building to another always looking for that perfect place.  Too bad that a lot of times we do not look to the perfect One, The Lamb of God who should be our direction and not the best choir, guitarist, etc.
God Bless and Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah

My husband and I have just become aware of this website - we are in the process looking for a new ministry opportunity after a five year journey of—well we will leave that alone.

I just want to thank you for the encouragement.  I needed it.  I’m sincerely glad you guys are out there working for the gospel. 

Thank you for addressing thoughtful processes, authentic relationships, and deliberately aiming for a corporate encounter with the living Christ in your churches. 

My husband and I often talk about what we call “The Waxed Fruit” syndrome in the church at large today.  It sure looks pretty, but you can’t eat it.  Often we are focusing solely on all the things we should be aiming through; the tools, or to extend the metaphor of edible food further, the pans we cook with.  It can become a very strange version of idolatry and works.  Jesus and a personal encounter with him should be our deepest goal.  That can be a unique process for every church not matter what the size.

I watched a pastor leave the podium in a huff recently because his microphone was buzzing - right in the middle of the invitation he sat down.  In the name of excellence her terrified his sound techs, and left the gospel message hanging with this parting sentence.  “We’re done.” Although I understood the distraction of a malfunctioning tool, I wished he could have been scrappy enough to turn it off and continue without it.

To me this has everything to do with this discussion.  Big or small; in riches or poverty, what are we aiming for?  Jesus was available to people everywhere synagogues, hillsides, lakes, homes, streets, palaces.  Scripture says sometimes he preached to 5,000 and sometimes went out of his way to speak to just one.  I can imagine his disciples discussing the numbers.  I can’t imagine Jesus giving it much attention.  He was aiming to bring people out of darkness into light. 

When a child is missing in the mountains, the community comes together.  The rich guys bring their RVs.  The poor guys bring their flashlights.  Someone makes sandwiches.  The people link arms and comb the terrain with every tool they have.  My heart cry is to quit focusing on the tools as if they are all important, and get back to figuring out how to find the lost kids in our church’s back yards.