Nine out of ten.
That’s a lot.
Nine out of ten churches in America have an average worship attendance of less than 350. And that percentage has not changed significantly for many years. Yet the unchurched pool of persons is increasing in most communities. There are people yet to be reached.
But most churches will never exceed 350 in attendance. Why?
A Few Caveats
Allow me to preface my analysis. First, big is not necessarily better. A church with more people in attendance is not necessarily more faithful than a smaller church. Second, some churches are in very sparsely populated areas. There may not be 350 people in a five-mile radius (though every community still has people who need to be reached).
My third caveat is key. I believe leadership is indeed a biblical and theological issue. It’s really a matter of healthy stewardship. I offer this third caveat because I will be addressing the issue of leadership in this post.
Attendance Levels of Churches in America
We are a nation and continent of smaller churches. And though we have far more small churches than large churches, there is a big migration of people from smaller to larger churches. In other words, many of the smaller churches are getting smaller, and many of the larger churches are getting larger.
Here is a simple depiction of the number of churches at three different levels:
- 50% of all churches in America average less than 100 in worship attendance.
- 40% of all churches in America average between 100 and 350 in attendance.
- 10% of all churches in America average more than 350 in attendance.
Keep in mind that the upper 10% tend to include more of the growing churches, while the lower 90% tend to include more of the declining churches.
One of the Key Reasons
There is no single reason to explain the apparent ceiling of 350 in attendance of most churches. I do believe, however, that there is a major reason for this barrier. Such is the thesis of this post:
One of the key reasons most churches do not move beyond 350 in average worship attendance is they do not have sufficient leadership and structures in place.
Many smart people have provided analyses of what is commonly known as the 200 barrier. I believe that the 200 barrier is highly elastic. In other words, the barrier is really somewhere between 150 and 350, depending on a number of circumstances. Again, I believe that the key reason stated above is among the greatest inhibitors of growth.
Increasing Organizational Complexity
Moses was an unintended victim of organizational complexity. He was trying the Lone Ranger approach to the leadership of Israel. The nation would implode and he would lose his leadership authority if he kept doing what he was doing.
His father-in-law, Jethro, saw the flaws of his leadership and said:
“What you’re doing is not good . . . You will certainly wear out both yourself and these people who are with you, because the task is too heavy for you. You can’t do it alone” (Exodus 18:17-18, HCSB).
So, following Jethro’s advice and wisdom, Moses became a different kind of leader with a different kind of organization.
Here are the five major levels of organizational complexity in churches according to average worship attendance:
- Under 100: Family and friends
- 100 to 250: Basic
- 251 to 350: Challenging
- 351 to 750: Complex
- Above 750: Highly complex
Most churches cannot or are not willing to make the types of changes that are necessary in complex organizations. In future resources, I will share what many leaders and churches are doing to move beyond the 100, 250, and 350 ceilings. In the meantime, let me hear from you.
Looking forward to the upcoming posts. I pastor a church that has plateaued at the 200 mark. I love reading for posts they have been very helpful to me being a young pastor. Thank you for what you do.
Thank you for taking the time to read them, Jonathan.
Hey Dr. Rainer you aught to talk to dad about this subject as he is one of the few pastors who has lead a church through all of these barriers and organizational structures. He might have some insights for guys dealing with the difficulties of the change process and what to do and what not to do.
Sounds good. Who is your dad?
Why Pastor Perry of course. 😉
My initial thought in reading this, is why does a church need to grow in number per say? Is church grow correlated to sinners saved?
Appreciate all this insight. Our church is exactly where this discussion is aimed. In fact, our pastors have read “Simple Church” and are on board with its principles. Is there a “Simple Church” designed for lay leaders or regular church members that they could read and get on board with this vision as well?
“I Am a Church Member” is a great place to start.
Hey Jonathan, I’d be interested in speaking with you if you still are in the plateau.
todd@the315project.com thanks
I’ve been the pastor at my church for 2 years, and we’ve grown from about 80 to 220 in attendance in that time… And stalled a bit. “Division of labor” is our greatest obstacle, it seems. When I arrived, everything we did was all hands on deck. We’re beyond our capacity to do that now, so there are lots of cracks for things to fall through. My goal has been to raise the value of service in the area of gifting and letting others do the same. It’s a long slow change because it involves changing people’s mind and having to tell them no. But it’s worth it! Even the small victories make a big impact on the psyche of the people, and the rapid growth makes it an easier sell. Can’t wait for the next installments!
“My goal has been to raise the value of service in the area of gifting and letting others do the same. ”
I’m not sure that I am reading this right, do you mean that you are trying to let people know that they can substitute money for active service? Does that mean that the congregation is “too” eager to offer their time to work in service projects? If that’s the case, I am sure there are a lot on here that would really covet that problem.
What he is saying is not necessarily that he is increasing the monetary value of his staff, but following a theory similar to the one used in my church. We postulate that it would be better to invest in ten people for a year who could do a job well thereafter than to have 25 people who are all willing, yet unqualified. It is one of the hallmarks of most larger churches: Professionalization of work. Not necessarily by paying people to do work, but by having people do their work well.
Thank you… I completely misread that. Part of the danger of using the same words to refer to different things I guess. I literally thought he was talking about gifting as it refers to say offering… kind of the way that we view missionary support. We aren’t called to necessarily serve in some far away land but our gifts (offerings) can be used to in that ministry.
That confusion out of the way, I comepletely agree with what he has to say, so thanks again.
LOL, I’m sorry for the laughter, I but i think you got it right the 1st time. He’s is talking about money, just take a good look at his language. He is talking about changing people minds, and programing them. It is obvious what kind of congregation he has, because you look at his goals. Because true believers, God has to be the one who gives them a new mind with new goals.
So in saying, since numbers are you goal you will accomplish that. You will have great programs, good children programs, and pretty cathedrals. But you will have a church full of non-christians, and the real christians have left the house. This is ,what is happening now all across the world and these people who have left the house are winning people to Christ, and many don’t even know this is happening. It is so sad today that people worship the church building and programs, and refuse to worship God. …………”these people honors me with their words and mouths but their heart is far from me”
It is so sad, it is just food for thought.
Chris
” But you will have a church full of non-christians, and the real christians have left the house.”
Real Christians should be out of the house telling others about God & Jesus, Sunday services are for the non- believer & new believers to learn more about God. If you are not getting what you need from your church – start a connect group of like minded people from your church that will fill your needs, then share your talents in the church to help others. God is about the numbers too… He wants all to hear and will go after even one that has not.
Rant over. 🙂
You are definitely on the right track, Jason. I thank God for your faithfulness.
Our culture is changing much faster than it used to and much faster than churches want to. Unreached people who visit a larger and more diverse congregation are more likely to feel they fit in somewhere. When a visitor enters a church and most people look the same and not like them, that’s a negative. Diversity and size are positives.
Agreed.
Thom,
I serve a church across the street from the CABC in Louisville who interimed at some years ago. We are in the family and friends level of complexity and struggling to move above it. At one time (1960s) this church was running about 350. From all appearances, they ran things the same way, much with the family type of organizational leadership. Do you think churches like this began to shrink in part because of this? AND, how were the general dynamics different that they were able to grow larger without changing structures at that time?
I definitely think many churches have declined for these very reasons. In the 60s it was normative in culture to go to church. Growth came easier. That is not the case today.
We just broke rank by abolishing the “nominating committee filling job slots” and replaced it with choosing “team leaders” to develop crucial teams that impact the purpose of the church. These team leaders have no “limited terms” and as God uses them they will begin to function as high-capacity volunteer staff.
The pastor’s new responsibility is not to focus on every person in the church but to work with, develop and vision cast with these team leaders. It has united the vision for children’s Sunday school, children’s ministry, VBS and other ministry to children under one team rather than three or four different individuals. For the first time we have an outreach team rather than just a missions budget. And so on . . .
Once the concept is sold to the leadership and the nominating committee it became a priority to immediately begin working with and encouraging the team leaders and teaching them that they were selected to be leaders not doers. (A concept that many pastors need to wrestle with.)
So far, so good. This is a change in direction that may take an entire season to become a vital part of a body of believers working together to accomplish the purpose of the church. Sort of like . . . “Their responsibility is to equip God’s people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ.” Ephesians 4:12 (speaking of pastors)
Club member contentment and comfort may be reason number two for slow or no church growth. Ministry is messy . . . re-read the book of Acts.
Thank you for continuing the dialog that is helping we leaders to lead more effectively.
Thank you, Jim. That is a great story.
Thank you for sharing this Jim. I love this sentence: “Once the concept is sold to the leadership and the nominating committee it became a priority to immediately begin working with and encouraging the team leaders and teaching them that they were selected to be leaders not doers.”
Good afternoon , my name is Cristian and I am pastor of a church of 100 members.
I thought of the idea to form teams to help in the growth of the church.
Could you give me some tips to start with this in my church ?
A big hug and God bless you.
Thank you for being so in target and blunt. Most of us can’t stand to face our realities! Keep challenging us.
Thank you, SC.
I am working in a revitalization for a church that is on the cusp of moving from the under 100 category to the 100-250 category. The current organization is very informal. Could you provide a key point or two on what sort of structure should be put in place to help us facilitate/anticipate this jump, or at least point me to a resource that speaks on this topic?
Todd –
The structural change you will need to make is to make certain, whatever is in place, the church is equipping new leaders. The size of the church will be too wieldy for one or a few people to have ministry responsibility. Also, make certain your church does not have any inherent barriers in place that would slow this equipping and empowering process.
Thom,
Thanks. As a follow up, where do you think the most important place is for us to be developing new leaders? Sunday school teachers? Volunteers for worship service? Administrative? Etc. I know that ideally we would have people stepping up in all the areas that the church is doing ministry, but practically we have limited people to fill roles and want to make sure we maximize the effectiveness of the first string of new leaders trained.
-Todd
They are all important Todd, but if I had to choose one, I would start with small group or Sunday school leaders. Those leaders are shepherds of the members in their groups.
May I suggest putting out a survey of skills and asking for volunteers. You never know who has experience.
We are experiencing the strains of moving from the “complex” to “very complex” in size. It’s required us to completely restructure some aspects of our leadership. Do you have any suggestions? How do we build a good structure to “hold up the roof” while not having so much structure that it gets in the way of ministry?
Jeremy –
Please allow me to address these types issued with future posts and resources. My brief comments would not be sufficient.
Thanks.
I have experienced the church of over 700 members and found it to be lacking in a “family” philosophy.
A church is to be a family. I now pastor a church of under 100 and this is more like a family.
When I arrived, unfortunately, there were too many members who were related, either by marriage, of biology.
This has become less of an issue because many have left as a result of my leadership style that has developed a high level of accountability and responsibility to biblical standards.
You are right on. Bigger is not batter. I believe that the idea that we need churches over 100 creates a competitiveness that is not conducive to spiritual growth.
Blessings. <
I hear you, Rich. But do we tell people in the under 100 churches to stop fulfilling the Great Commission?
I think that the advice that you gave above would apply in this information as well. You advised that you should always be equipping leaders within the congregation. If you are intent on staying small while still reaching the lost, you can do that by equipping leaders that don’t necessarily have to serve under the same roof as the original congregation.
I don’t know where he has led with this, but Francis Chan put out a video about this a couple years ago. It was based around home churches primarily, and keeping the groups to around twenty with a plan to create a new group when it outgrew that. It was specifically addressing those two issues in union.
@Dallas. It is not necessarily MY plan for the church to stay small.
Sure, I would love to reach the 75 to 100 mark but that has not happened.
My goals are to be faithful to my call.
Equip the saints for ministry…
Every facet of ministry God has for this congregation.
If you reach people, you grow. If you go out and “witness” and they “accept Jesus” but never join the church, you’ve not reached them. If you’re not baptizing and teaching those new converts, you’re not fulfilling the Great Commission.
Just a few things to keep in mind.
This seems to be addressing me, but I’m not quite sure what it is addressing. If anything I would think that many small groups would better serve to teach and train up than one large one, as the ground level interaction is able to stay more personal.
I agree with what you are saying, no cheap grace evangelism. I just don’t see how what I said goes against that.
Never! My wife tells me that the recurring theme in my sermons are “preach the gospel”!
After growing from 300 to 900 we birthed a new congregation in the adjacent city with 100 of our people and our very gifted associate pastor as the preacher/leader. All 100 are going as missionaries to the city with the hope of seeing the gospel impact their friends, co-workers, family, etc. Close to 80% of the city is not active in faith according to the last census (about 150,000+). As we are working through the leadership structures, we were told that church plants that don’t break 200 in their first two years rarely do. Have you found that to be accurate? We are being somewhat mindful of this and aggressive in our structuring for the purpose of mission.
Bill –
I can’t verify that stat on church plants.
I’m in a replanting situation and we have grown from 35 to 55 people in just under a year. I’d love to know how to lead through the Friends/Family orbit into the next leadership dynamic rung (at least). I believe that we will do that, and once we do we can continue that trajectory and keep growing as a church and gospel influence in our community. But so far the struggle has been to just galvanize any real momentum in any direction. Any further insights you guys could share would be great! Thanks. – cg
Chris –
I hate to put you guys on hold, but I have a lot of information to share on these issues. I hope to have it available soon.
As a Pastor who has seen our church go from that 350 range to 850 in the past 18 months I would say I agree totally. We have been staying awake at night trying to figure out how our structure can keep pace with our growth so that the growth would be sustainable. The result has been hiring new staff, expanding congregational care networks, adding new bible groups and dealing with space and parking issues. Needless to say we have a lot of balls in the air.
I would just add one thing to your post is in order for the church to grow the Lead Pastor will have to trust staff and lay leaders more. He will most likely need to feel like he is less in control of everything. He will most likley have to do less and be more focused or else he will become a bottle neck restricting future growth.
Well said. That is incredible growth!
I’m looking forward to read what you have to offer.
Being an Umc pastor, I always wonder if the organizational structure, suggested by the book of discipline, is really suitable for the context of each ministry. Does the complex structure really enhance the church being missional, or does it work the other way around. Also, for most of the churches that are small, do they really need this complex structure?
Those are the questions I hope I can earn insight from your post. Hopefully…
Would you know of any resources on how to structure that leadership for above 750? I can’t seem to find anything good.
Much appreciated!
Sam –
I will check. I do plan on addressing these issues more fully later myself.
Take a look at St. John the Divine in Houston, St. Thomas Church in New York City. These are very large parish churches.
Thank you for addressing this topic. I’m realizing this is more and more important the more I observe churches. It’s often difficult even to raise or speak about in a lot of churches.
I wonder if you have any observations on how this works outside the US? I’m in a UK context, and it feels like all the major organisational barriers come at much smaller church sizes than is described in US material I have seen (e.g. Tim Keller). Ray Evan’s recent book ‘Ready Steady Grow’ did tackle this helpfully from a UK perspective, but in my experience we’re seeing the particular challenges some see at 350 at 80-90!
Obviously UK churches are much smaller on average, but it would be interesting to know if there are structural differences as well? Or different expectations?
Sam –
Different cultural and geographical contexts do affect the specific barrier levels. In reality, the most common US church attendance barrier is 75, since about half of the churches in America are smaller than that.
Separate the secular and religious sides. The two are rarely related yet some church leaders attempt to do both and then micromanage everything. Also, organizational management is something that frequently needs a manager, not a minister, to do. It takes some gutsy leadership to hire someone and give that person authority.
True.
I am probably viewing this outside the regular box. We have determined not to be larger than 500 because we want to remain personal, vertical, and simple. Those are our values. So when we get to 500 we will have a holy split and move 150 down the road to birth a new church complete with a pastor, leadership, worship team, ministry teams…. We planted 2 years ago with 4 families and now run 140. Most people who join our church come from the mega church model. And there is a group of churches here in SC that have done this successfully for a decade planting 4 new churches.
I believe that believers in our nation want personal. The huge desire for mega church days are subsiding, I believe, as people seek more real relationships and not just spectating attendance.
You mentioned that complexity is a reason churches have a ceiling, agree. But maybe their lives are too complex as is and people want simplicity at least with their spiritual desires. When a church gets beyond simple, the organism becomes an organization and the business model begins to run the church. We don’t have consumers, products, and profits. We have individuals, sanctification, and glory.
So as least from this aspect, an end game is a good thing to hold on to. I suggest that having a prescribed ceiling is something to consider as positive.
Preaching to people you know and so can care for them is good. When a pastor begins preaching to so many people he cannot know them, he ceases being a pastor and becomes a preacher alone. But that is another issue for the church to consider.
You are to be commended. You leading growth by multiplication rather than addition.
Thank you! There is a culture and generation where every bit of what you said resonates… simplicity over CEO… relational over acquisitions. It’s not an “us-four-no-more” philosophy. It’s just an acknowledgement that deep, connecting relationships were the point of the church. Numbers came b/c the relational meant something more than an event attended.
THANKS for the daily emails! It is much appreciated by those of us who are in the trenches of local church ministry! I would like to make one comments on this article. First a very brief background. 16 years ago I took the lead pastor position in a small community of 15,000 people in Western Indiana. When we began, the church was running 20 people, with the average age being 64 years old. Today we run 1100 in worship on Sunday mornings. So, we have faced all of the growth barriers you mentioned in your article. From my perspective, looking back 16 years, one thing is key …
1 – the leader has to be willing and intentional, to grow his personal leadership ahead of the growth of the church. If this doesn’t happen the church will hit it’s ceiling and get stuck.
Thanks again,
Terry
Thanks for letting me invade your inbox, Terry. And you nailed it with your response.
Im curious, how much of this has to do with the ability to hire the needed additional staff members as a church is in the 150-350 range? I’m sure various demographics impact this question, but am curious about how not having the resources to bring that needed staff memeber to help take it to the next level impact this issue ?
Adam –
The need could indeed be hiring more staff; or it could be equipping more volunteer laity.
I do not think there is one single reason why churches do not grow. But a number of smaller churches do not grow is because a certain number of established members do not want to lose their ‘small’ church. They will not make room for new members to get involved in leadership or they will not participate in discipleship. They enjoy having their uninhibited connection with the pastor and do not want to lose their place. In a nutshell, they will sabotage growth.
Very true.
I am looking forward to the follow up to this post as well… I pastor a church that is pushing the three hundred mark. (currently running in the 280’s) Our structure is currently more of a small church mentality but we realize that changes are necessary for future growth and thankfully the church is up for the challenge. We are looking for direction and I am interested to see the future posts. I attended the ALPHA pastor training recently and found it to be SUPER. A tremendous blessing. Excited about the future! Thanks for all you do Dr. Rainer.
Blessings!
Scott
Thank you as well, Scott.
Love the post and thankful for your insights in this area:
The current church I pastor has been plateaued around 110 for the past 20 years. It seems that for every member who joins, one seems to drop out.
I know your analysis is right and know that we must do better in the area of leader development. We want to be a growing church and a church that is a blessing to our community.
My prayers for you and your church, Jeremy.
I’m looking forward to your future posts. I’m a church planter that has hit and seems to stick around this mark, but naturally and then as we continue to send out groups of people to plant new works. I’d be interested about how to structure leadership when you don’t have the budget to add more staff or you don’t want to create the culture of firing current staff to bring in hired hands to create a bigger business structure when you’ve worked to hard to plant a New Testament-esque church that is a family of missionaries to a specific location.
Thanks, Noah. More is on the way.
I don’t understand why having 350 and under in attendance for a church should be a “problem” anyway (as Thom mentions in the beginning, here)? And … BTW – “Leadership” is neither Biblical nor Theological. The word “Leadership” does not even exist – anywhere in the Bible; out of the 5 times it is hinted at in the Hebrew Bible, which was based on the Septuagint and Targums (the oldest translations going back 200 years B.C.), it refers to Jehoiada (Joadas in the Septuagint) as the “chief of the family” or the remaining as “chief officers” in the Army. Isaiah 55:4 is referring to Jesus Christ, the Messiah: “Behold, I have made Him a testimony among the Gentiles, a “prince” and commander to the Gentiles (Septuagint trranslation). The other 2 remaining references are referring to “leaders” in a negative context – one of which is Jesus speaking of “blind leaders.”
With that all said … what is really the key issue here, is that churches should be focusing on Quality, not Quantity!! Why are we taking “head counts” in church? The Early Churches were small House Churches, and were mostly named by the Women of the household – Paul refers to “some of Chloe’s household,” as well as Lydia, Nympha & Priscilla … and John, in his personal letter (2 John: 1), addresses it “The elder to {the) elect lady and her children, whom I love in truth.”
If we truly find that people are leaving churches and not coming back, it’s mostly due to the fact that people either have been hurt by the church, abused, rejected, or are just plain weary of the hypocrisy. They don’t care about “Leaders” – they just want to be Loved and come to a church where they are truly Welcomed – not just “Greeted” by some plastic, smiling, “Stepford Husband or Wife” type! Where are the true Servants & Slaves (as Jesus puts it) of the Church?! Until people Stop trying to be Leaders and be more concerned with Loving, Caring, Supporting and Washing the Feet of their congregations, will they notice a real change in the attitude of the people attending.
If you refer to Thom’s other post on “Mean Churches” and read many of the comments, you will find how this whole fascination of “Leadership” has created a Legion of Church Drill Sergeants & Tyrants within the Church – which either causes there to be consistent transients, coming and going, or people just leaving the church, outright.
If you want to speak of “Church Attendance” – I have personally witnessed our current church grow from approximately 50 people in a small theater, to 350 people (using a school facilities) – to a former Movie Theater, with a capacity of 500 people (with 2 services) … to our current “Megachurch” status – which was built from the ground up – and has a capacity of 900 seats, with 3 services. With all of this, from our family’s perspective (as well as many charter members and elders who ended up leaving), our church better served it’s congregation and was a tighter-knit church “family,” when it was a “350 and under” church. Now … with a total of approx. 3,000 people attending, there is such a turnover of people coming and going (and leaving the church), there is no unity or community, though they always try to convince newcomers that they will be joining this great “community.” And all they talk about is “Leadership”!
It’s all about the “Big Show” – Leadership, Business, Real Estate, & Money and has become nothing more than a “Country Club” Church. It’s a great ploy to increase your attendance numbers, but it does nothing to honor The Lord. Hitler knew all about “Leadership” and had One Million people at his Nuremberg Rally. You can be a “Leader” and have amazing attendance at your gatherings, but nothing in the definition of Leader or Leadership is synonymous with Christianity. I challenge you to look up the word “Leadership” in the Thesaurus. The words “Jesus,” “Christianity,” “Holy Spirit” & “God” appear nowhere!! Also … pull up “Leadership” in Wikipedia and in the entire description, with all of its History & varieties of different Types of Leadership, it says nothing about The Bible, Jesus, or Christianity … except one sentence – referring to Mother Teresa: “According to Howell, Mother Teresa is an exceptional example that embodies integrity, assertiveness, and social abilities in her diplomatic dealings with the leaders of the world.” It does say that Julius Caesar was one of the World’s Greatest Leaders! Do we want to follow the Julius Caesar model or Jesus Christ??!!
My son is a “Millennial” (“growing up” in our church, from the time he was 6 years old) and he admitted that he likes the big “Rock Concert” type atmosphere in church, otherwise he’s bored! I recently had a gig in Teaneck, NJ and my son and his girlfriend stayed over in NYC and my wife and I in Hackencack. The next day, a Sunday, my son took his girlfriend to Hillsong in NYC, while my wife and I spent the day at The Cloisters (museum and gardens, the branch of The Metropolitan Museum of Art devoted to the art and architecture of medieval Europe, was assembled from architectural elements, both domestic and religious, that largely date from the twelfth through the fifteenth century.) in NY. Quite a dynamic!! Compared to our Megachurch, spending a day at The Cloisters, for my wife and me, was one of the most uplifting, inspirational, spiritual experiences we have had on a Sunday, far surpassing most of what we experience at our “Megachurch.”
My wife and I attended a Hillsong concert a number of years ago. What was was really appalling, was the fact that, immediately following the concert, with all the thousands of people who attended, my wife and I watched in amazement, how everyone paid no attention to the homeless people sitting on the sidewalks, – right in everyone’s path – and had no problem walking right by these poor people!
So … which is it – Quality or Quantity??!! Should we really be caring about whether we have 350 (more or less) people in our congregation, or are we treating Church as a Business and using the congregation as Pawns on a Chessboard? It was only The Lord, not Moses, Who delivered the Jews from captivity. Moses was simply a Servant of The Lord, for it was The Lord who provided the Manna and the Cloud of protection, which proceeded no faster than the slowest person or animal. And similarly, Jesus Christ says “If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them wanders away, what will he do? Won’t he leave the ninety-nine others on the hills and go out to search for the one that is lost? And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he will rejoice over it more than over the ninety-nine that didn’t wander away!” (Matt 18:12)
Be Servants, my friends – Not Leaders – and The Lord will increase your flock tenfold!
Amen! When will Thom reply to this comment?
Out of your entire comment, the part that stuck out was “our church better served it’s congregation and was a tighter-knit church “family,” when it was a “350 and under” church.”
Not to over simplify, but the mission of the church is not to serve the needs, wants, and desires of the congregation. The mission of Jesus is also our mission, to seek and save the lost.
Hey Mike,
Thanks for your response to my comment! I was happy to hear that at least there was one thing in my long comment that stuck out! 🙂
I totally agree with you, that first and foremost, the Mission of the Church should be (as Jesus commissioned us) to “Go out into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature” – meaning that we spread the Good News of the Birth, Life, Crucifixion, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension of Jesus Christ to all the world – which kind of goes without saying, if we are already Belivers! However … it seems that many churches are so busy preaching “Leadership,” that they end up rarely preaching anything out of the Gospels and Jesus’ words and spend most of their time worshiping Moses & the Apostle Paul!
When it comes to our actual Gathering Together in “church” I would have to disagree with you, though, Mike.
Church is Supposed to be a Gathering of Believers, Not of the Lost. When the Disciples gathered together to Worship in the Early Church, they were All Believers – they didn’t bring non-believers into their churches. How can you Worship if you have Nothing that you believe you’re Worshiping?
I know people bring Atheists & Non-Believers into churches with the hopes that they will be saved, but our Lord Jesus Christ told us to Go Out into all the world – Not to bring the non-believers into church. The Only people who were allowed into the main court of the Temple, were Jews who believed in YHWH, and a special Outer Court was made for everyone else (the Gentiles). This is another whole Topic – about how Churches Compromise their messages to accommodate the Non-Believers who have come into their (“Seeker-Friendly”) churches and has become a problem with how Worship is conducted and the Gospel of Christ watered-down and compromised. I know it’s a tough issue because All are Welcome into The Lord’s Kingdom, but our Mission To the Lost, should be Outside of Church. Jesus did His work of reaching The Lost – Outside of the Temple! Then … once the Lost have become Believers, they come in to Worship The Lord they already know.
Jesus had specific instructions to His Disciples – first, He says: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. “It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your Servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your Slave.” Then He said in John 13:34-35, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. “By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”
Therefore … based on what Jesus says, it’s quite clear that when we Gather Together As Believers – Yes – we are to Serve the Needs, Wants & Desires of the Congregation! When we are finished worshiping in Church and exit through the doors, it is Then that our Mission is to “Go Out into All the world and preach the Gospel to Every Creature!” And by how much we love and serve the needs, wants & desires of our fellow Believers (the Congregation), the world will know we are Christians.
Many thanks, Mike!
God Bless 🙂
Mark –
I don’t see any size church as a problem, specifically the 350 barrier. The issue is obedience to the Great Commission and the Great Commandment.
So, if there is no issue on the size of the church, why place a specific number in the title of the article? Why refer to it as “breaking the barrier?” If it is not about size of the church, and competition to see whose church can be larger, why is this article not about planting new churches once a church gets to a substantial size? There is no one formula that can be used to figure out why some churches grow larger than others. If you can explain the reason you are growing with the words I or we, without using the words obedience and following Jesus, then there is no true growth. True growth is a spiritual growth, and with the spiritual growth, may come numbers, maybe not, but what you will be getting then is a generation that is working inside and outside of the church walls to complete the task that has been set before us. One of the issues I have found with a larger church, and in the past actually purposely attended larger churches for, is that you can easily get lost in the crowd, and just check off that you have done your Christian “duty” for the week by attending church.
I am a student pastor at a church that is about 12 years old and to my knowledge we’ve never broken the 350 barrier consistently. Over the past 4 months we have seen steady growth in our Sunday morning experiences. And I believe it is all due to the changing of how people here are treated. We’ve began to apply the V.A.B. principle. (Value people, Appreciate them, Make known that they BELONG) That may seem like a small change and I’m sure most of you are thinking…well of course you should do that dummy. But think about it…do we really apply this principle to our ministries? Do people really know how we feel about them and their families. Or are they just a number that will help us break the 350 barrier. If your church doesn’t make people feel Valued, Appreciated, or at Home (Or Belong), they will find a church that does.
Good stuff. Thanks, Tony.
Dr. Rainer, might there be a correlation and/or causation that a church at the 350 member mark might not be able to afford the leadership needed?
Possibly, Mark. The corollary is that we might need to discover better ways to train and equip leaders in those churches. Your observation is astute.
What is the breakdown by age of the 350 people? How much pastoral care is involved? Can lay people be used? If your average age is young, then you will definitely need a different type of personnel than if the average age is skewing older.
Thank you so much for your posts Thom! To me they are vital bits of wisdom and information that help sharpen and develop me as a leader.
The church in which I serve (as Assistant/Student Pastor) is definitely in the Family & Friends category. Our obstacle and hinderance in growth I believe rests in what you have previously called a “power group” of laypeople. In my opinion this group struggles (unbeknownst to them of course) with the spirit of Absalom and all that accompanies that spirit. I am doing everything that I know (in prayer and leadership) to guide them in armor bearing for our head pastor and to rally around him and his vision.
So in response to your post, I believe that power groups can be a large hinderance to the church’s growth past these plateaus .
Secondly, would you happen to have any thoughts or book references that could assist me further as a mere support pastor?
Carl –
There is no such thing as a “mere” support pastor. Your ministry is invaluable. Though the book is 10 years old, I still recommend “Leading from the Second Chair.”
Thank you! I ordered the book today and am looking forward to it!
Great post and can’t wait for the followup. I pastor a church in North Saint Petersburg Fl not to far from Azalea. Within 3 miles we have over 100,00 people yet we are unable to break the 50 mark. You heard right 50. You nailed it on the head with insufficient leadership. I am the only paid staff. I have been here for almost 9 years. Sad I know. The leaders that come our way tend to have control issues and do things publicly and privately to undermine the ministry. Had everyone stayed that I have baptized or have joined and left we would have to have two services and our auditorium holds…you guessed it 350. Is there a way to overcome this? I have gone to our association and pastors of the larger churches and they have no answer. Also most of the smaller churches here are having the same problem. Very Frustrated!
Love the area, Skip. I hope to have some more info soon.
Tom; Looking forward to hearing more. I was asked recently if I money were no object what would I do. My answer; I would hire a full staff of trained ministers, Music, Outreach, Students, Children… On Wednesday nights the first thing we pray for is trained leadership. I’m still praying. 🙂
Can you then write about moving past 750?
Yes, I will.
One reason I did not see on the list is that congregations eventually reach capacity for their facility. A building will only accommodate just so many people and allow them to function comfortably. Beyond capacity people begin feeling cramped and the level of comfort concerning their personal space being challenged. I know of people who have left churches complaining that the building feels crowded.
Secondly, and I believe its already been touched on: larger congregations require even more workers which brings us again to the age old problem that plagues most churches today, and that is getting people to volunteer is like pulling teeth.
Our small church of 200 just had its paid custodian resign and in order to save money the church decided to keep the facility clean by using member volunteers. You can probably guess where I am going with this….and you would be right. We created monthly sign up sheets so members could sign up for a 30 day turn at completing a small cleaning task within the building. Initially about 10 members filled all the slots of responsibility on the list. Sadly….we are now several months into this method and I notice that the same 10 people have been signing up every month since this plan was instituted. Each month there are public announcements made requesting volunteers for the next month. I asked why the same people are signing up from month-to-month and was told its because nobody else will sign up. In scanning the list I notice that these same 10 people are people that are already up to their eyeballs in responsibility around the church. They see that folks are not volunteering so they go ahead and sign up for something else that needs to be done around the church.
For folks that are in leadership this is probably the singe most aggravating issue of church life that makes leaders just pull their hair out. Every body wants this and they want that in the way of programs that they can enjoy and offer to the public but nobody wants to do the work. A small church that offers no nursery facility or youth programs because no one will volunteer cannot offer these programs to new people seeking a church. No nursery or youth programs means people will most likely go down the road to a church that does.
In my opinion this is the one of the greatest factor that will keep a church small. A church will only grow to the level of its volunteerism.
Thank, Hal.
My question is, what do you do when you have a small church with an unnecessarily complex structure? Part of the problem in the church I’m now pastor of is that there some ministry structures in place that are completely unnecessary and unhelpful for a church our size. Is it better to break these down, or to leave them alone and focus on other areas?
The handful of people who always volunteer is the place to look for leadership. Those are the people who are anxious to serve, who have servants’ hearts even when they’re tired. Those are the people setting the example. A servant is not always a leader, but there’s a good chance a lot of those people have leadership potential if anyone would work with them. One question I don’t see here (maybe I missed it) is whether a pastor and his family w-a-n-t to grow beyond a family structure. Whether a pastor–and their spouse–are willing to trust others to lead in different areas. Whether a pastor–and spouse–are willing to give a little slack to volunteer leaders, or if others in the church (really paid or volunteer) can only implement exactly the way the pastor (or spouse) wants things done. We’ve had less experience with small groups in congregations always calling the shots, and more with pastors and spouses who couldn’t share their control. One pastor told me once that it never worked for him to have an associate pastor, as though the associates were always the problem. Really? A church can’t grow when paid staff or congregants with leadership ability are ignored, or misused, to maintain whatever it is that the pastor and spouse can’t let go of. See Barna’s book Revolution….
Isn’t it possible that some of these churches are planting other churches that would keep their numbers down?
Dr. Rainer this is an awesome teaser. I look forward to hearing more.
Coming soon . . .
I think the weight in these posts is too much behind leadership and organizational structure, and not enough behind societal, location, and spiritual factors. I appreciated the first two paragraphs that referenced this, . . .but I just don’t think that churches stall MOST of the time because more structure is needed. Allow me to place one vote in the “we have too much structure in the church” column. I think we’re so far in the other direction in the American church and it’s not close. Pastors need to be meeting with people, developing other elder/shepherds to meet and connect with people, and multiplying groups for those people to connect. What we don’t need it complex church programs such as kids/youth/welcome ministry that can’t be staffed and are run poorly. If they can’t be staffed well. . . don’t do them, (or do them differently). Less structure, less programming. . more shepherding and community. If your church is only at 150 doing those things, help plant another church in the next town and do the same thing there. . . . .
Apologies for the many typos in that comment (including my name :))
This is very true. It seems to get especially tricky when a church has shrunk from more complex to less over a long period of time. When one tries to change old methods, citing an attempt at growth, folks balk because, “This is what we did when this placed was packed to the gills!” It becomes difficult to adjust to 1. the current size and 2. the current culture in order to facilitate growth. Then, you’re stuck with outdated methods suited to a much larger church in a much different cultural climate.
Hi Thom,
I look forward to your blog on this. In my opinion, complex systems offer a tremendous opportunity for the local church today to break out of the status quo by applying complex systems leadership principles. It’s a whole new ballgame that we need to be teaching our seminarians today. This approach to leadership also solves many of the issues of engagement of millennials.
I look forward to this discussion.
Mark Lindsay
i see a lot written for the 200 and even 500 barrier… As a pastor of a church of 750 for years now, I wish someone would speak into that barrier, I realize there are fewer of us, but please address this in the future… We really want to keep growing!
How do we get passed 750?
Thank you for these provocative, biblically based thoughts. This is why small groups are vital. I would add that they need to be intergenerational as Jethro suggested to
1) mentor new leaders
2) comfort in suffering
3) accountable for actions (age related patterns of sin)
4) less cliquish and likely to promote divisive own agenda
5) stable
My church is at 350. The issue for me is the role of the pastor as spiritual leader: preacher, teacher, mentor, prayer versus his role as administrator: manager of ministries, organizer, marketer. The former requires quality time if the gospel is to have any depth. The latter requires a different skill set. How to do both well is the challenge in organizational development.
Hi Thom,
A former senior pastor of ours Warren Crank has written a book called The Resolute Leader. Its been circulated widely in Queensland Australia and we have found it helpful in developing Jethro principles, and a team building culture. We also loved Simple Church as well and used it widely.
I’m happy to send a copy of Resolute Leader, its been recommended by Ed Stezer and others. Could you provide a mail address. No commission for me by the way just found it very helpful.
God Bless
Michael
What fascinates me about this article is the apparent assumption that churches should naturally want to grow beyond 350 people. While you acknowledge that not all churches do, nevertheless you assume that the desire to do so is the rule.
I’m wondering what it would look like if, instead of trying to grow churches bigger, the norm was to grow them outward, i.e., plant more churches? Instead of pastors hiring more staff and scaling up budgets as they try to cross this threshold, what if they developed a core group of lay leaders out of that 350 to begin the process of starting another church?
Chuck: Your point is well made. Many churches today are expanding by planting new churches and starting new campuses.
Hi Thom, I enjoy reading your post. I am an associate pastor of a church that is just above the 200 mark. And we have been there for some time. I am anxious to hear you definition of Basic & Challenging. I assume that you are referring to Basic Leadership Level & Challenging Leadership Level.
Thanks,
Bob
So if these statistics are true and 50% of churches in America have an average worship attendance of less than 100, are these churches(those with an average attendance of under 100) employing bivocational pastors? If not, then why not?
ever heard of Dunbar’s number? you might find it illuminating.
wow, I am reading your article 3 years after post. Really feeling outdated…
I think that church growth is divine (not that we are not responsible for it). But the main thrust is God’s love and mercy (using these terms loosely here).
The one trap I see is that the smaller churches are trying to imitate bigger churches methodically and hope to land as a bigger sized church. Just hope that we only stay on course to imitate Christ and let the church size be as it is divinely predestined. just two cents – bw
An observation I’ve made over the years echoes one of the comments I read, and that is the more paid staff a church of a given size has, the fewer volunteers there are stepping up. I believe a great deal of that is related to two things. 1) how the Word is presented. and 2) whether the pastor(s) exhibit volunteerism themselves. Why is it that many Pastors count their evening time as “work” hours (i.e. working 4-5 hours on a Wed. since they will be running Wed night Club), when the layperson has worked 8-10 hours and is then coming to volunteer and serve? Which brings us back to #1. The heart of the Pastor can be seen by his love for the Word, and his love for his flock.