Religion & Spirituality >
Christian Beliefs & Culture
RSS FeedIf a church has a very small congregation, should it disband?
Results so far:
| Yes | 9% | 33 votes | Total: 352 votes | |
| No | 91% | 319 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesIt is true that no minimum attendance exists for a body of believers to be considered a church. It is also true that small congregations can be an invaluable asset to the community in which they serve. However, there are certain instances when having a small congregation is symptomatic of a larger, more destructive issue. When particular issues create a small or shrinking congregation, the church should be closed or combined with a growing church.
1. Lack of concern for the community
When a church has lost its concern for the community it should be serving, then that congregation no longer has a biblically legitimate reason to exist. Jesus commanded his disciples to "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation" (Mark 16:15). This includes a church's own neighborhood. What is the wisdom in striving to save souls around the world if a church is blind to the needs of its own community? If a church is failing to see growth or is losing members because it is no longer serving its community, then it should be disbanded.
2. Unhealthy desire for control over resources
There are times when a church is small in attendance for purely innocent reasons. They may serve a community of 80 and have a congregation of about 25 (which is pretty good size for that community). However, in some cases, there are a few people who have control over a majority of that church's resources and refuse to relinquish it. They may be wealthy families, powerful individuals, or even long-time members. Occasionally, these people desire to maintain control for reasons other than service, calling, or love. They can cause a church to resemble something like a corporation rather than a family of believers. It can lead to disunity that would negatively affect every member of the congregation. If this happens and the people are not removed, then it would be better for the church to close or combine with another congregation than to continue hurting itself.
3. Lack of overall spiritual growth
Many churches are small or shrinking because they lack spiritual growth. There is simply no spiritual nourishment for unbelievers, seekers, or even believers to be drawn to. The Lord tells the church at Laodicea "I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were one or the other! So, because you are lukewarmneither cold nor hotI am about to spit you out of my mouth." (Revelation 3:15-16) The church is a place for people to grow in their relationship with God (among other things). If that is not happening, then the congregation is little more than a social club. Under this circumstance, the church should close.
4. Opportunity to improve effectiveness
Every now and then an opportunity arises for two or more small, healthy congregations to come together under a single banner. Each congregation may have different resources that would be more beneficial to the community if they were combined. This instance may not mean that the churches should close, but rather that they should combine their resources to serve their community. A church's identity is not in its name or denomination, but instead in its adoption into God's family. As such, if two or more churches can work together to serve their community better, they should.
I believe that ineffective churches are common in America, but probably not in the rest of the world. I do not think that a small church is inherently unhealthy, and I hope that this article does not create that impression. If anything, I have witnessed more unhealthy large churches than unhealthy small churches. I simply hope to show that under certain unhealthy circumstances, it is better for a small or shrinking church to close than to remain open.
Learn more about this author, Meagan Ewton.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.
No
A small congregation does not mean small spirituality, and should not be disbanded for having fewer members.
I am a 'PK' (preacher's kid), and have spent the majority of my life in small churches. My dad took his first church when I was five. There were seven people in addition to the six members of my family. Over a fifteen year period the membership grew to around sixty and then reduced to between twenty and thirty. Dad's next church was also very small, averaging around or less than 20 members at any given time, and his current church is only between six to fifteen members. So why are these congregations small? Is my dad that bad a preacher? No. Simply put, he feels the call of God on his life to churches that need help the most - those that are small and being rejected by most preachers because they lack the opportunity for self-glorification.
I am now nearing the age of 30 and married to a man who also feels called to pastor in a small church. Through our time in college and in the years immediately following we have seen countless numbers of young men looking to pastor, but instead of praying only for God's will they have a starting standard of what they would personally accept in a church. Few men want to take a ministry that will need a lot of work and TLC because it will not necessarily pay off in big numbers and a grand reputation.
In some of the larger churches (I use that term loosely, representing around 100 to 300 members) the fight is on to keep gaining numbers by any means necessary. In this push they are offering more and more of what I call 'Sunday school attractions'... classes that include more games, songs and rewards than teaching substance and draw children in primarily for the fun they can have. This trend goes all the way through adulthood, offering classes for teens and college and career courses that after the fifteen minute lesson resemble a Christian dating club more than what they are supposed to be: courses preparing the teens and young adults for life as serious and effective Christians.
Small churches do not offer these programs. They often lack the money to purchase the resources that would draw in large numbers. I ask, does this mean that a small congregation is of any less spiritual value to the members who attend? On the contrary, I have been in enough small churches that I have drawn the opposite conclusion. In very little congregations children learn to sit still and listen to the Word of God. They get more one-on-one time to ask questions of teachers and come to really understand the importance of a serious relationship with God. These children are prepared for sitting through a half or an hour long service as adults and come to truly appreciate what it adds to their daily lives. In small or even tiny congregations you are left with the believers who are so serious about God and church that they attend Sunday morning and evening AND Wednesday evening.
Small churches have a much higher percentage of attendance than larger churches, and a higher percentage of children that grow up into attending adult members than a large church with many programs that ceases to be 'fun' when its children reach the age of sitting through a service with no perks. So, while a small church cannot afford a pastor that is out for money and the glory of high attendance, it can offer a more serious Christian education to its attendees, a more personal attention to illnesses and times of crisis, and I believe a more satisfying personal experience overall. There is no limit to the number of members a church can accommodate; neither should there be a minimum requirement. For churches like the one my dad currently pastors, located in a very rural area; a small congregation is still a mighty stronghold in the lives of those who take their relationship and their worship of Christ seriously. Why would we even consider taking that away from anyone?
Learn more about this author, Jennifer Wells.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
