Perhaps it isn’t obvious after all.
The other day I wrote: “…although I’d rather see a full church than an empty one, we really do have to give up the notion that the church with the most members is the one that’s transmitting the gospel most effectively.”
I didn’t think that was particularly noteworthy, but it has been suggested to me via email that to some this might sound like I’m suggesting that the church should be empty. So just in case you think that’s what I mean, allow me to clarify.
First, note the first part of that sentence fragment: “I’d rather see a full church than an empty one”. I don’t know any preacher who’d argue with that. Anyone who suggests that I somehow like or prefer empty churches is either deliberately mis-representing what I’ve said or has problems comprehending the English language.
I said what I meant, and meant what I said. It is not true that “the church with the most members is the one that’s transmitting the gospel most effectively”.
I think of a little congregation on a tough housing estate which has been reaching out into its community offering care and compassion for years in the name of Jesus. The gospel has been (and is being) faithfully proclaimed in word and deed in that place, and despite setbacks of every kind the folk there remain true to their calling to be the church in that place. The congregation there may yet grow. I hope and pray it will. But if it does not, that will not be a judgement on the discipleship of the wonderful people there who have quite literally kept the faith against all odds.
If you’re tempted to believe that full churches or packed meetings are a sign of God blessing the faithfulness of his disciples, get to a telly with cable or satellite. Find one of the many channels that where you can watch one or more of the TV evangelists. Listen to the rubbish that is peddled in the name of Christ and observe the crowds that are lapping it up. Then tell me that large numbers are a sign of the gospel being effectively transmitted.
The truth is, neither a large congregation nor a small one by itself means anything. Our task is to sow the seed we’re given, to remain faithful to our calling and do our work even when it is hard and dry.
When the harvest comes, it won’t be because of our plans, systems, schemes or efforts.
If we lose sight of that, we risk losing sight of the gospel itself.
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
Kim 11.18.08 at 7:13 am
Crystal, Richard. With my usual tact, I suggest that anyone who disagrees has got to be a moron.
I would add, however, a question: wherever did we get the idea that the church militant will ever be anything other than a minority, counter-cultural community getting on the nerves and in the face of Rome? Certainly not in the New Testament. The church, as Rowan Williams would put it, is not in competition for space in the world. That is why an obsession with organizational effectiveness, performance, and results quite simply misses the point. The way of Christ is the via crucis, the denouement of which is an historical failure. Why should the way of a faithful church be any different? Ecclesiastical triumphalism is a pitiful heresy.
Will 11.18.08 at 7:32 am
I agree Richard (and hopefully avoid the title of moron!).
I guess what I am asking myself more and more often is why is our barometer ‘full’ vs. ‘empty’. When I first arrived here, I spoke with a superintendent who was explaining part of the British Methodist mindset to us Americans. He mentioned that for a movement that started with classes meeting in people’s homes, why are we now so connected to our buildings to think that we cannot have church without one? I would love a small, committed group of Christ-followers, but why not a group without the hassle of a building and all that it entails!
Paul Martin 11.18.08 at 9:12 am
I am of course seeking numerical growth. Amongst other things it would make my life a bit easier. But such cannot be the whole picture. I have seen numerically successful churches which proclaim a God who is akin to Monty Python’s big boot coming down on people. Equally I have seen small churches that exhibit great saintliness - one such church in our circuit has just come to the end of its life.
So whilst I am attracted to seeing full rather than empty churches, this is not necessarily an indicator of faithfulness. And I think that it is faithfulness that matters mist to God - even over numbers!
Richard 11.18.08 at 9:51 am
@Will: I’m sure no one would direct the m word at you. Plenty of others they might use, of course!
I agree with you about buildings, and if you were starting with a group of a dozen, you wouldn’t think about putting them into a 100 yr old building with a seating capacity of 200. But we are where we are, and our stock of buildings is part of that picture.
@Paul: Absolutely. I’m certainly not saying that big=bad or undesirable. But as you say, faithfulness matters more than numbers.
Of course, we could apply the logic of equating size to faithfulness to Christian blogs. Then we’d be saying that a blog with a larger readership is better at proclaiming the gospel than a smaller. Where would that leave us?
dh 11.18.08 at 3:24 pm
Richard, I totally agree with what you are saying but I totally disagree with Kim further explaination. We ARE called to be “counter-cultural”. We ARE called to prclaim the triumphant Christ as well as the triumphant return of Christ. Scripture stated that this is NOT heresy but a fact. To accuse otherwise seems rather odd. I will say we need to be “wise as serpents and simple as doves” there are times we shouldn’t “cast our pearls before swine” and there are other times God wants us to “remove the sin in the camp.
Tony Buglass 11.18.08 at 5:49 pm
DH, I think Kim was saying we ARE called to be counter-cultural; the triumphalism he was attacking wasn’t eschatological triumph, but the kind of triumph which happens when a church becomes strong and celebrates in its own strength
dh 11.18.08 at 7:44 pm
I see Tony. That then begs the question can a church celebrate what the Lord has done through the church? Couldn’t this get misunderstood by people outside a particular church as “celebrating in ones strength”? I think people who look at a church which “celebrates” judge and say “they are celebrating in their own strength” when in fact they are just celebrating what God has done through the particular church for the Body of Christ to be encouraged and strengthened even more than otherwise. Sometimes it IS out of flesh and ones own strength but before we need to be careful that we are not downplaying what God truly may be doing in these churches.
Craig L. Adams 11.19.08 at 4:04 pm
With his usual tact, Jesus had something to say in Matthew 5:22 about those who call their brother ???? (”empty headed”) or ????? (”moron”).