Post Info // super fun stuff.
How Big is Your Church?
So often we “count” the people that show up to “church” on sunday mornings as people who are part of our community. question is posed: why don’t we count the people who are actually connected to our community through the web of relationships?
Example, in our faith community, we have anywhere from 60 - 80 people showing up to a worship gathering. so, from this we say that our church is about 60-80 people “big.” When really, we have about 60-80 poeple who are (hopefully) redemptively living lives with a number of other poeple in their personal lives. CAN THIS MEANS THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE CONNECTED TO OUR COMMUNITY. Can it be that they are part of our church because they are in relationships with people in our faith community?
If yes, can you see the amazing perspective this puts on our understanding of people’s value to the congregation? We only count poeple when they show up on Sunday mornings to “church.” But, isn’t “church” = community? So we “count” the people that are connected to our community through the web of relationships that flow from our community.
Let’s just say our 60 people have relationships with only 5 people. That means our congretation is touching the lives of 300 people! can we be open to say that we have 300 people in our community?! This is not a way to make me feel better about the “size” of our church, but rather a means to show that each person’s ministry and role in the community “counts.” its not just the stuff done from the pulpit that counts. each person’s “ministry” (i.e. redemptive relationships) count for the kingdom of God….
hmm….
Dan Benson said...
102/2/05 12:04 PM | Comment Link |
Rick Warren says to measure your church’s “sending” capacity instead of its seating capacity. In this context, I think the definition of “sending” is what you describe — God-directed individuals making connections with others, casting a fisherman’s “net” of relationships.
– Dan B.
Crnbrdeater said...
202/2/05 12:05 PM | Comment Link |
For the church to function as a unified body of believers its members need to have a strong unity in their core doctrinal beliefs. While it is most definitely deadly to the health of a church to permit too wide a stance on these core doctrines, I think too many churches make every doctrine a core doctrine. This effectively paralyzes them from being able to minister to anyone not exactly like themselves let alone have any sort of fellowship with the local Christian community. While small numbers are not an indicator of this type of church they are, more often than not, the end result.
That being said I doubt this is too much of a problem in the emerging church. If anything the emerging church tends to swing too far in the other direction. A little too “accepting” perhaps.
While I may not agree with everything in the emerging church I find the community/relational aspects of the movement compelling. One of the defining aspects of the Christian walk is our love for our fellow believer. It is much easier to form close-knit, biblical relationships in this kind of family atmosphere.
Provided a church is actively engaged in Christ centered ministry to its non-believing neighbors its attendance count has little meaning.
Gerald said...
302/2/05 12:07 PM | Comment Link |
Todd,
I think that your line of thinking is helpful, particularly in respect to your last comment that such a perspective helps every member of your community understand his/her vital role in the ministry of the Church.
I wouldn’t want to abolish all lines of demarcation between members and non-menbers though (not suggesting you’re advocating this). I know the whole “emerging” paradigm is hesitant to draw sharp boundaries about who’s in and who’s out, but I think that the Church needs to maintain at least some line of demarcation (even if it is subjective) between those who have “repented of their own story” and have embraced the story of God’s redemptive work and the present reign of Christ’s kingdom.
I guess I’m trying to say that I think the people connected to the church as members are in a different category than those that are connected to the church as non-members.
But all the same, I think such a perspective has merit and helps the members of a church understand the interconnectedness of not only their immediate church relations, but also these second tier relationships. Just as I would embrace someone you might bring to church, so too I can embrace your friend even though they may not be ready to come yet.
Matt said...
402/2/05 12:08 PM | Comment Link |
We have a strange problem at the Rock
More people in our small groups than attend our weekly large group meeting.
Why is this a problem? Because our small groups are supposed to be where we do our “sending”. Where we disciple eachother, engage in the mission together, serve together, etc. But I have a feeling that people use the small group time for simple socialization. Hanging out and goofing off.
So it always confuses me when our “numbers reports” come in saying we have more people in small group than we do in our large group meetings.
Why are they not coming together to worship with us, to celebrate and have fellowship with the rest of the church.
I just think its a funny problem :)