On Planks, Specks, and the Size of Your Church

Posted by: Chris L
in Commentary, ODM Responses, Original Articles, PD/SS
8
Nov

A little watchdawggie with a comb-overWhat exactly is the need to seek and find fault with specific churches – particularly large ones? Are there not enough problems within our own individual churches that we must seek out and find the other churches to say to (or about) them “you’re doing it wrong!”

Do we attack megachurches because they are easy targets, or because that’s where all of the Christians (or, if we want to show our self-righteousness, “church-goers” or “Christians” (in quotes)) go? I saw an interesting graphic from Christianity Today, taken from American churches. It’s should not be all that surprising, but for the disporportionate amount of sound and fury from ODMs (Online “Discernment” Ministries).

Churchgoing dataBasically, if you define a “megachurch” as a church with 2,000+ members, about 6% of the Christians in the US attend one of them. Or, if you lower your definition to 1,000+ members, the number increases to 10%.

So, in reality, all of the fuss and fury over megachurches is focusing on 6-10% of the Christian population in America.

One thing not measured, though, is the influence these churches may (or may not) have over the other 90-94% of the churches. This is a double-edged sword. I think we can probably agree that the relative size of a church can not be the SOLE indicator of a church’s effectiveness or maturity. However, I think that it is also fair to say that a church’s size and growth CAN BE an indicator of effective witness and living as part of the Kingdom.

Aside from isolated nutcases in the backwaters of New Hampshire, or elsewhere, what pastor does not want his flock to increase in size and maturity? What pastor (aside from the aforementioned nutcases) would see the shrinking of his church as an indicator of Christian growth? I mean, really?

It is only logical, and good stewardship would suggest that pastors would do well to learn from other pastors how they have successfully lead their flocks, and how they have grown in maturity and numbers. Because size is one of the few objective measures that CAN BE (but do not have to be) an indication of godly “success”, pastors in these larger churches often get asked to present/write/discuss the journey of their church and how God led them during that journey.

Where discernment is required is in sorting out a) if these suggestions from other pastors are anti-biblical; b) which ones of these suggestions might translate into the culture of their local church; c) of the ones that would translate, would the way you translate them be in line with where you and the other leaders of the church see God leading it?

I would agree that a number of pastors looking for ideas do not ask these questions, and then fail (in one or more ways) in ways they would not have otherwise failed. But is that failure on their part or on the part of the church they are trying to learn from? I’d put the blame at about 80/20, with 80% on the local pastor for not asking the right questions, 20% on the ’sharing’ church, who may be culpable in mis-diagnosing what has translated into success, and 100% on anyone involved who didn’t bother going to God before giving/receiving advice.

I found it refreshing that the Willow Creek Association (WCA) was willing to be self-reflective to see what, across churches of different sizes and communities, the local church could to do grow in maturity and size. I find it sad that the people crowing the most about the results of the study seem to be the petty, small-minded ODM critics who a) haven’t read it; b) if the read it, didn’t bother understanding it; and c) go out and trumpet twisted interpretations of the results. It’s not surprising, since this is their modus operandi in most of the “research” they do, but it is ungodly coming from within the church.

Despite this, I hope the the WCA churches will continue to try to grow in maturity and size in the Lord, and that other churches – large and small – will be willing to learn from each other as part of the the Church, as a whole. I hope that they will be willing to share with each other, despite carping from the sidelines that leaders should be creative geniuses who develop 100% of every idea, program, outreach and sermon on their own. Learning from each other is a good thing.

And for those who are just content to sit on the sideline playing plank/speck, casting stones at the biggest targets available? The only way to avoid making a mistake is by not doing anything in the first place. Additionally, if you’re making a huge deal about ’size not mattering’ (or that size is a demonstration of ’selling out’), perhaps you’re just suffering from a combination of small man’s disease and sour grapes with a good dose of pride.

  • Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted on Thursday, November 8th, 2007 at 12:39 pm and is filed under Commentary, ODM Responses, Original Articles, PD/SS. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

 

+/- Collapse/Expand All

30 Comments(+Add)

1   nc    
November 8th, 2007 at 12:57 pm

I remember being in the same room with a noted mega-church pastor who told me that he believed mega-churches were flukes and not representative of how the church generally is organized.

Seems these stats bear that out…but it’s amazing how we think something is pervasive and normal if it gets a lot of attention.

For all their railing against the media it seems the “discerning” have been hooked by the very effects they lament.

2   Paul C    http://www.themidnightcry.com
November 8th, 2007 at 1:02 pm

You hinted somewhere in the middle about the influence megachurches have beyond their own walls – and this is important. Hasn’t Purpose Driven been exported to 100s of 1000s of churches who try to mimic their programs to some degree? So that eliminates your first argument as the influence cannot be minimized or denied.

Plus, aren’t you a little tired of all these polls which really mean very little? I mean, come on, 10% “Not Sure”??

Secondly, many of the megachurches preach a flavor of false doctrine or warp the gospel to make it appealing as possible. Who would of thought that the church would actually be reduced to “Top 100 Most Influential Churches” and “Most Influential Pastors” – gimme a break.

Somehow I can’t see Paul or the other apostles, or for that matter the prophets, being (or even wanting to be) on those lists.

Jesus has been reduced to a product for the most part and smart marketers have learned how to brand Him for their benefit.

3   Bruce Gerencser    http://www.brucegerencser.com
November 8th, 2007 at 1:14 pm

There is something, it seems, in the American Psyche, that dislikes success, winners, progress, etc, especially when it illuminates our own lack of success or progress.

Witness Nascar and Jeff Gordon. Great guy but many fans hate him. Why? He wins.

Years ago, I pastored a new Church plant in a rural part of SE Ohio. The Church grew rapidly and we, at one time, had over 200 hundred in attendance. This seems like a big Sunday School class in the city but in the sticks that made us the largest Protestant Church in the County. I was amazed at the things people said about us, even supposed friends. Some questioned my truthfulness about the growth. Others made sly jokes about our attendance as being “evangelistically speaking.”

Of course when the Church declined in attendance (a whole other story) they could then sit back with smug assurance and say “see I told you so”

Sadly, some pastors can be more territorial than a tom cat. They despise success anywhere but their Church.

Let’s rejoice whenever/wherever God’s word is preached even it it isn’t quite like the way we do it.

Success is not measured by numbers. It is measured by faithfulness. If God gives increase, great. If not, be faithful.

4   nc    
November 8th, 2007 at 1:33 pm

I left my last church…the senior pastor worshipped at the altar of PD. He didn’t have the leadership skills to lead, but he was intoxicated by the “vision” of it.

5   Joe C    
November 8th, 2007 at 2:49 pm

Church size means nothing. Truth counts for everything. Let’s talk churches OUTSIDE of America, where the Christians are put to death for their faith, you know, like the original Church. There’s no marketing there, the churches are small, by necessity, and faithful (because they’re going to die for it, or go to prison). Let’s pray for them, and for us here, so that we might remember that Truth, Jesus, is what matters, and not how big or glamorous we look or are.

Not that big is a bad thing, of course, I’m just saying it’s not the litmus test for blessing or truthfulness. If it’s big and preaches the whole council of God, fantastic. If it’s big because it preaches ‘tickling-ear’ doctrines (read: false ones) and makes promises for God so as to sell Him, then uh…not so good. You know? I’m not saying this in judgment of any churches that I know of, just as a general statement. But uh…Benny Hinn comes to mind. lol lol.

Love,

Joe

6   Paul C    http://www.themidnightcry.com
November 8th, 2007 at 3:07 pm

I agree with Joe C here. Church service – especially those that are televised – have become little more than stage performances with nifty themes, lighting effects, expensive sound systems and the like – all in the name of excellence and giving God our best. Little discipleship but great outward show.

You may find that if truth is central that church growth may not be all that astounding. Bury the truth or let it out of the cage only on occasion and you have a recipe for growth, especially if you’ve taken a few psych courses and understand human nature.

7   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
November 8th, 2007 at 3:13 pm

Somehow I can’t see Paul or the other apostles, or for that matter the prophets, being (or even wanting to be) on those lists.

Certainly Paul and the apostles lived out their ministry with humility but make no mistake they want to be as influential as possible. Influential to make Christ known far and wide. Even the most biased of observes (sans the Keningridites) would recognize that their are mega-churches preaching a strong salvation message.

Going back to a previous post to assume that all mega- churches are preaching a soft gospel to inflate numbers is unprovable and non-sequiter. Furthermore to imply that mega-churches are mega-churches because of the soft gospel message and dying churches are dying because of a solid gospel message really goes against scripture i.e. Acts Chapter 1-4.

8   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
November 8th, 2007 at 3:22 pm

You may find that if truth is central that church growth may not be all that astounding.

Serious question…How do you present Truth in a cultural that denies it?

Let’s talk churches OUTSIDE of America, where the Christians are put to death for their faith, you know, like the original Church.

Martyrdom and persecution will always elevate and expand a cause. Regardless of the cause. It’s a two fold equation.

1) The cost (my life, my standard of living, safety, etc…)is higher to commit.
2) Every movement in history that had a martyr grow by leaps and bounds. When you’re willing to die for what you believe in it’s really easy to convince others that it’s worthwhile.

I left my last church…the senior pastor worshipped at the altar of PD. He didn’t have the leadership skills to lead, but he was intoxicated by the “vision” of it.

That sounds more like a pastor problem and not a PD problem.

9   Tim Reed    http://churchvoices.com
November 8th, 2007 at 3:30 pm

I don’t know. The records of the number of people baptized and gathered at various places in the NT church are listed for a reason. Not to mention there does seem to be an emphasis on number in both the original covenant with Israel and the various censuses taken after that. Is bigger better? Not necessarily. Is bigger inherently worse? No.

Secondly, many of the megachurches preach a flavor of false doctrine or warp the gospel to make it appealing as possible. Who would of thought that the church would actually be reduced to “Top 100 Most Influential Churches” and “Most Influential Pastors” – gimme a break.

Just as “the gospel” isn’t the three thousand baptized in Acts 2. Setting these up as the sum total of large churches is, to say th least, dishonest.

10   Paul C    http://www.themidnightcry.com
November 8th, 2007 at 3:47 pm

Sometimes we fail to recognize that the 1000s “swept into the kingdom” on the day of Pentecost were not all genuine converts. In fact, many of these people were later directly responsible for the judaizing of many of the churches… So it’s not always a good idea to reference this single event, astounding as it was (not trying to detract from it, but simply lay out the facts).

chris asks the question, “How do you present Truth in a cultural that denies it?” No different. The truth is that the truth has never been popular and has always been denied by the masses – from prophets to Christ to apostles to today.

I am not trying to present a formula that large = compromised. That does not have to be the case. Sadly, though, this seems to be the trend for the large part. But God will be the final judge.

11   Paul C    http://www.themidnightcry.com
November 8th, 2007 at 3:52 pm

The moment you start looking for “cute” or “shock and awe” ways to present the gospel to make it palatable to a culture that rejects it you start down a very slippery slope – oh wait, we’re already halfway down it already!

chris – the bottom line is that it would be hard for any of us to envision the Apostle Paul or Jude or Isaiah or Jeremiah on any of these ridiculous lists that are published as though they mean something.

As I said in my first post, the influence of megachurches goes way beyond their walls – just look at the Christian book store or televised preaching and crusades. These directly impact other churches and people as well so I would throw that pie graph out the window as it means nothing. Still can’t get over the 10% who “Don’t Know”!!

12   Phil Miller    http://veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
November 8th, 2007 at 3:52 pm

Sometimes we fail to recognize that the 1000s “swept into the kingdom” on the day of Pentecost were not all genuine converts. In fact, many of these people were later directly responsible for the judaizing of many of the churches

I’m not trying to be antagonistic, but what proof do you have for this statement?

13   Tim Reed    http://churchvoices.com
November 8th, 2007 at 4:00 pm

As I said in my first post, the influence of megachurches goes way beyond their walls – just look at the Christian book store or televised preaching and crusades.

In this case of televised preaching I think you may have switched the cause and effect.

14   Paul C    http://www.themidnightcry.com
November 8th, 2007 at 4:03 pm

Ac 15:5
But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

These guys didn’t go away but followed up with Paul’s churches despite the Apostles’ decision not to force circumcision.

In some of Paul’s letters, he also addresses the influence of these individuals (Galatians especially).

That was simply a point that is often overlooked – not trying to digress from the post.

15   Phil Miller    http://veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
November 8th, 2007 at 4:11 pm

Paul,
I’m aware of the Judaizers, but it seems to me we can’t say for sure they we among the ones who believed at the Day of Pentecost.

Also, don’t get me started on the whole false convert thing…

16   Matt    http://matbathome.blogspot.com/
November 8th, 2007 at 4:13 pm

Ac 15:5
But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

This says nothing about the Judiazers being the “false” converts from the Pentecost. You are reading way too much into scripture. We don’t know where the Judiazers came from.

17   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
November 8th, 2007 at 4:16 pm

Paul,

You wrote:

Still can’t get over the 10% who “Don’t Know”!!

I suspect that the “don’t know” folks are at the edges of the categories (between 250 – 350. 450 – 550, etc.). There are folks who are so analytical in their thinking that they won’t/can’t answer that sort of question if they don’t know the EXACT answer. It’s not that surprising (coming from a guy that frequently runs surveys).

Sometimes we fail to recognize that the 1000s “swept into the kingdom” on the day of Pentecost were not all genuine converts. In fact, many of these people were later directly responsible for the judaizing of many of the churches

And you know this how? Estimates of the number of people who followed Jesus in Israel in the years after his death and resurrection range in the hundreds of thousands, and they all met in their local synagogues with their Jewish brethren who did not follow Jesus.

Just a follow-up note: A ‘church’ goes beyond the walls of the building and exists beyond 2 hours on Sunday morning. A number of the ‘megachurches’ on size-listings are really collections of house-churches which gather together for corporate worship once a week (for example, Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids).

18   Paul C    http://www.themidnightcry.com
November 8th, 2007 at 4:17 pm

You’re right Phil – though it’s probable it is not certain. I have no issue with growth – somewhere in Acts it says that the disciples “filled Jerusalem with their doctrine.” That’s awesome.

It’s the issue of counterfeit growth simply due to marketing techniques, appealing to the flesh (catchy series names, lighting, etc), the diluting of the truth that is at issue. That’s what is happening today for the large part.

A million miles wide, an inch deep.

19   Paul C    http://www.themidnightcry.com
November 8th, 2007 at 4:20 pm

Chris L – how did you arrive at the number “hundreds of thousands”? In 1 Cor 15 Paul mentioned Christ appearing to over 500 people at once, but 100s of 1000s?

20   Matt    http://matbathome.blogspot.com/
November 8th, 2007 at 4:23 pm

Paul C -

I wouldn’t put it past the Holy Spirit that all those who came to Christ on Pentacost were authentic Christian conversions.

21   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
November 8th, 2007 at 4:28 pm

Paul,

These come from Josephus, the Dead Sea Scrolls and other historical documentation from the first century – particularly those which record the exodus of Christians from the area of Jerusalem, per Jesus’ instruction in the Olivet Discourse, at the appearance of the Roman army, prior to the siege of Jerusalem in 67 A.D.

22   Paul C    http://www.themidnightcry.com
November 8th, 2007 at 4:32 pm

Matt, this would not be a slight against the Holy Spirit at all. In fact, Jesus mentioned the parable of the sower that kind of deals with this. wayside, stony, weedy and good soil. The last 3 all respond at some level. Jesus also mentioned a parable about the gospel being like a net that gathers everything in (good and bad) to be sorted.

This is where God is the judge.

What I stated was not meant to be conclusive, but perhaps something that we may need to consider. Bottom line is that Peter didn’t compromise the gospel on that day to “win friends and influence people.” It could just as easily gone the way it went for Stephen or James.

What’s happening today is largely the combination of:
1. clever marketing with Jesus as a product
2. a large population of people who like to have their ears tickled

23   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
November 8th, 2007 at 4:32 pm

Paul,

You’ve set up a false dichotomy here,

It’s the issue of counterfeit growth simply due to marketing techniques, appealing to the flesh (catchy series names, lighting, etc), the diluting of the truth that is at issue.

Professional marketing, sermon series linked to ‘catchy’ themes, lighting, etc need not lead to “counterfeit growth”, whatever that is.

How many of Rick Warren’t sermons have you listened to, and how many small group Bible Studies have you attended at Saddleback? How many Willow Creek services have you attended, and how many of their small groups have you visited to make this determination?

24   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
November 8th, 2007 at 5:02 pm

Sometimes we fail to recognize that the 1000s “swept into the kingdom” on the day of Pentecost were not all genuine converts.

Not trying to be antagonistic either but why does the inerrant word of God say and “thousands were added to their number” if that wasn’t the case.

25   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
November 8th, 2007 at 5:10 pm

In my mind this seems appropiate to post here for a couple of reasons 1) Please pray 2) What a powerful witness

A young woman in our church had served in missions down in the Dominican and built many relationships during her time. With the recent hurricane many of those relationships have been sending her reports and updates. This is an excerpt from one such report.

-The church in an old theater in downtown Barahona that is serving 550 people are amazing. They are super organized and you can tell they had a disaster plan and were using it. It was working very well. The church has been raising funds to build a new building. When this disaster struck, without a blink of an eye, they made the decision to use the money they collected for the new building to buy the supplies they needed to help these people in need. This week, the building owner notified them that he had sold the building and they would need to be leaving the facility in the next few months. That is sad but it shows the compassion this church has.

I can’t think of a better way to present the Gospel message.

26   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net/lp_blog/blog.htm
November 8th, 2007 at 9:15 pm

Simple.

If you have poor aim, you need as big a target as you can to make a direct hit. Hence, the beautiful target that a megachurch makes, for it is a very big church and is frequently targeted by those with bad “aim.”

(The dog-toupee photo is really…something.)

27   nc    
November 8th, 2007 at 9:15 pm

It was both.
PD was clearly not a fit for the culture of the church. It’s implementation was actually detrimental.

I’m not a big fan of PD because it’s too cookie cutter.
It’s reflective of a particular suburban middle class value system of religion. It just can’t possibly work for all.

The pastor…he was a whole ‘nother story.

28   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
November 9th, 2007 at 8:15 am

PD was clearly not a fit for the culture of the church. It’s implementation was actually detrimental

.

So knowing the culture is important when trying to disciple and evangelize! Who know?

29   nc    
November 9th, 2007 at 9:30 am

Chris,

yep…there’s that pesky “contextualization”.

Evil emergentism.

30   nathan    http://www.nathanneighbour.com
November 9th, 2007 at 12:00 pm

I love our standards that we have in American Churches. First off, there is a problem when people applaud a 4 member church for being overy discipled but tear down a 30,000 member church for being evangelistic. And, let’s be honest here… 75% of the garbage written on CRN about church groth stems from jealousy. It’s the one emotion that seems to be undertood without needing to hear voice infletion or tone.

I love how the ODMs site the martyrs in closed countries, but fail to see to BOOM taking place all over the world in the church. 600,000 memeber churches in Korea, 130,000 member churches in South America… estimated 1 million in underground church in China that are startegicllly relocating themselves to the middle east to reproduce. Oh yeah… and China is FULL of martyrs, but they find some way to pass on the gospel.

But, somehow we have to point out that not all of the 3,000 at pentacost were true converts… hell, even Peter can’t get his doctrine right apparently. The fact is, numbers DO MATTER. How you get those numbers matters as well. The issue is not pure numbers… the question is “what are you doing with the people that God has placed in YOUR neighborhood, work and family”? If you are actuall living out the great commission and the great commandment… YOU WILL GROW!!

2 Trackbacks/Pings

  1. For the humanity of it all… « Love without Agenda    Nov 08 2007 / 5pm:

    [...]  Over at a blog I visit they had a recent post about the size of churches  in the United States.  Down in the comment section one commenter noted: [...]

  2. Bullet Points » Nathan’s Blog    Nov 09 2007 / 8am:

    [...] I’m loving this story from CRN.info.  It really broke it down to what the whole issue with people criticizing large churches.  I like how they point out that people like to go after the biggest targets available.  The bigger the target of your criticism, the more attention you’ll get for doing the critique. [...]

Back to top