How big should a church be - contrarian view

Whenever I look for ways to improve spiritual vitality of a church, I find most of the links move me toward size growth. One approach even teaches you to "launch large." Megachurches get all the attention, and seem able to attract the remnants of small churches as they dwindle in size.

With so much emphasis on size, what is the value of smaller churches? Do they have a future?

Richard H Bliese says that small churches - rather than a relic of the past - are especially valuable in a post-modern culture. He says that small churches "can go places and risk ministries that larger churches would find undesirable or impossible." They can operate on the margins, to be bold, to be nimble.

Bliese suggsts we must abandon traditional ideas of what church is and redesign around relationships. It will need "meaningful worship, worship in which people sense God’s presence and grace-filled activity." It also needs "meaningful opportunities for building and practicing Christian fellowship."

In short, small churches have a continuing role in the kingdom. They must of course be willing to step forward. In many cases, small churches like being small, they are comfortable being comfortable. But for the church willing to stretch themselves, they can find areas of need in the margins. One local church here holds a weekly lunch for the workers in the adjacent industrial park. A few others pass out day-old bread or open a clothes closet. Some coordinate local participation in national charity events.

And help the out of touch and unchurched find community and hear a Gospel in their own non-church language.

Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to spend more time being relevant than maintaining the structure of a large organization. Start by reading Richard Bliese's article.