ever since returning from africa, i’ve wondered something.
is it just me, or does THE CHURCH seem to have its funds distributed fairly unequally?
if we are all THE CHURCH (made up of individual, local churches)
and, if we are shown an example in acts 2:44-45:
All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.
then why:
is there a hard working children’s pastor making $75/week and who gets his office furniture from the side of the road because his church can’t afford to buy him any?
are churches closing because they don’t have enough money to sustain ministry?
edit: and i won’t even go into listing things that are broken in churches around the globe and in impoverished countries.
when:
other churches are building multi-million dollar facilities…in the same town, on the same road, right across the street from each other?
…i could make this list longer, but i am sure you get the point.
like really.
why?
Comments
97 responses to “churches that rob each other??”
I wonder that myself. I would love to see churches helping churches. I could say more, but I think I’ll think about it for a while…
Good thought. That ticks me off a bit too, but I understand a little why it happens. I don’t doubt that God is calling those huge churchs [like my church is building] across the street to be built. Having 4+ services in a tiny building to moving into a large building with 2 services hoping to make more, thats a good reason. I also can tell that those in ministry deserve pay that fits the outstanding work they do. This kind of scares me about entering into ministry, not going to lie.
I’ve got to say that I go to one of those multi-million dollar churches (I have not always) and to be completely (and embarrassingly enough) honest, I have never thought about it. That’s a wonderful perspective that you bring and a very good quesiton.
Thank you for inspiring me to think!
because we don’t really believe in the vision Christ set out for us. if we did, you would see on the budget sheet where the money lines up with the values and vision of the organization or individual. we care a lot about image and that’s obvious with our super cool “worship centers.” but people generally aren’t as excited to support an individual in their community who is struggling financially nor are they willing to look around them and find ways to bring heaven to earth (outside of the church). again, it’s easy to believe in God when we’re well fed and living the life … if we were all starving and desperate for a piece of hope, i think our values would change a little.
i’m just sayin.
Seems to me that Southeast Christian Church in Louisville KY supports a small local church. That of course, is not the norm. But a good example to us all.
God’s economy. It’s different. He absolutely provides everything we need to do what he has called us to do. Sometimes he makes us wait a little. Sometimes he wants to teach us something on the way to receiving a particular piece of provision. However, I believe that most of the time, in developed nations, the reason churches don’t have enough to meet their needs is because people in that church are not willing to be generous.
SMM – Absolutely. I know a lot of churches do support missions and other churches. Great example.
have you seen this post? http://fatdaddye.wordpress.com/2008/04/12/another-cynical-megachurch-post/
competition?
Most churches in America have lost focus today. They focus on buildings, programs and events instead of people. Jesus focused on people and He ministered at the point of need and didn’t wait for them to come to the synagogue. Christ followers are the true Church and they minister at the point of need as Jesus showed by example.
(1 Peter 2:21 NIV) “To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.”
http://www.LovingGodFellowship.org (LGF) is all about people. We have decided to rent facilities for services in every city we plant a LGF in and invest in the people of the community instead of buildings. We will never have a building program or a building fund. It’s all about people and ministering to them at their point of need.
Anyone interested in planting a LGF in their city can contact me directly at [email protected] .
Know that you are loved,
gaj
My biggest fear in the American Church is how we steward our money. I’m not anti-mega, but I think we need to be wise and create a greater understanding that we are “The Church” therefore we need to care for those other members who don’t have some of the luxuries we have.
This is such a tension and it’s hard not to become critical. I just hope we can focus on macro (the world and global church) and not the micro (my church that I pastor).
Focus on Acts 2:44-45… everything else are just that: things.
i was going to say the same thing along the lines of SMM. i feel like this is an unfair question cause the mulit-million-dollar church (if their vision is pure) are building these buildings to accommodate the growth they’ve experienced. i feel like the question should be, if the motives are pure and the vision is pure, then why do some churches grow when other churches don’t?
i know the multi-million-dollar church i work for and attend fully funds smaller churches all around the world. orphanages. soup kitchens. rehap centers. which i think is using God’s money the way it was should be. we’re able to do considerably more than a smaller church, simply because there’s more people in it and more people, should mean more money, if we’re teaching them to be good stewards and to the tithe.
I think the church limits its view on “growth” significantly (and I am not even talking about spiritual growth here).
Growth does not mean it gets bigger.
My dad’s church grew all the time but the attendance stayed the same.
It was in a migrant town – so people would move based on farming seasons. I know the people he invested his life into moved and continued to spread the Good News wherever they went.
The way I see it, that is growth that can’t be measured.
I don’t want to sound like a douche, but I think there’s a silent rule about ministry.
“If we know that our church is doing a wonderful job reaching people, why is that little church across the street even there?”
I agree and disagree with this thought. On one hand, if they’re not growing and don’t have any potential to grow due to whatever reason, then why should my church send money to something that’s pretty much on the way out?
On the other hand, maybe all they need is a good check with a fews 0’s to get them jump-started. The truth is, however, that the case is usually the first and not the latter. Thousands of churches have grown exponentially with almost no money, so that really shouldn’t be an excuse, most of the time.
BTW, this is NOT an unfair question. Check out the link on Spence’s comment and then come back and say this is an unfair question.
It really should come down to the simple fact that we were created to love one another and to help one another in need.
Yet it never does.
It should not be about competition. It’s all about having the same goal and doing whatever it takes to get there.
http://www.vagabondrunn.wordpress.com
I think it comes down to pastors not seeing it as their duty to minister to an entire city. They tend to have a smaller focus on just their attendees.
If we could break down the pride and competitiveness between congregations it would sure be helpful. A major problem is that pastors are viewed as more powerful or more holy the larger the numbers go in the church. This causes an unhealthy focus on protecting what “belongs to us”.
I think growth should be measured, not by numbers and cash brought in, but by stories of individual and city transformation. Working together as the church of OKC would do more good that all of us working as individuals.
I am on staff at a “smaller” church and it rubs me to hear people from “mega-churches” say things like “I know that we can do a whole lot more than a smaller church can.” Now I understand the spirit in which these words are said, but when you attend and work at a smaller church, the logic says that a “mega-church” is…well…just more valuable than a smaller church. And I think there lies the answer. I have finally come to a place personally where I no longer feel competition or like we just can’t “make it” like a “mega-church”. So far this year I have been to Niger, we have helped build a church there, we have ministered to several families who just walk in needing assistance, we have baptized 2 adults this year so far, our small group ministry has grown as we have gotten more “regular” attenders involved. Are these things to the scale of a “mega-church”…no. Are they any less significant because we occupy less than 100,000 square feet and our annual operating budget is less that $200,000 a year? I know…everyone agrees…the poor small church fills a very important need…blah, blah, blah…NO. WE are THE fulfillment of THE need…worldwide. EVERYONE. EVERYWHERE. Let’s quit talking about “mega-church” versus “small church”, “building” versus “renting” and just go and do what God has called each of us to do. Sometimes we do those things together. Sometimes we do them individually. The classifications only exist because WE put them there.
I think the more appropriate question is why we have churches building multi-million dollar facilities when:
1) There are people in their own communities, not to mention across the globe, that don’t even have enough to eat.
2) Larger and larger only encourages more and more people to sit passively while a professional pastor teaches and a professional musician sings. When the Biblical model is *mutual edification*.
It’s about resources, yes, and it’s about discipleship. Going larger and larger is being a bad steward of both issues. Going smaller is being a good steward of resources as well as teaches the Biblical principle of mutual edification in church gatherings.
Then again, how many churches actually sell their possessions and goods and give it to anyone who needs within their own communities?
Why would did drop down $300 for an iPod when that could have helped someone in my own community pay rent?
Derek-EXACTLY.
Yep, I’m with Derek 100%. Right on.
And yet I still attend a “mega” church.
I don’t want to just stop going but I hate that I’m a part of this mega church phenomenon.
Anne,
Another perspective, just for thought … sometimes, could it have to do with stewardship? I’m sure it’s not always the case – but is there a “REASON” that the bigger church is thriving, and the other is not? Could there be a stewardship issue involved?
I remember the parable of the talents … God gave each person the talents, and at the end, the ones who were good stewards of what they were given received more … and the ones who weren’t … even what they had was taken away from them.
THIS IS A HARD THOUGHT, and someone could quickly say I’m being judgmental or harsh … and since I don’t often comment here, most folks don’t know me … but I can assure you, that’s not my intention … but I can say that indeed, it’s a perspective that I couldn’t help thing may come into play at some point…. NOT ALWAYS, by any means … BUT maybe sometimes.
Hope I didn’t just open a big can of worms. :-)
Fred
PS: I wouldn’t classify our church as “mega”, although it’s definitely one of the largest in the area. I believe we give at least 10% (a tithe) of every thing that comes into us back out as offerings for missions, ministry support, both local and abroad, and our leadership has the desire to do even more.
Wow. I’m afraid Anne’s gonna rewrite her Mad Church book before she even gets it published the first time.
Good stuff, girl.
I wish – in a loving way – that all churches would sell their buildings, meet in schools and theatres, and dump whatever is left into helping the poor and foreign missions. Just me. :) I think church buildings are a misunderstanding of the word “temple”.
larger encourages more to sit passively???
if the pastor and leaders of the church don’t lead…provide opportunities and encourage the people to serve…our church has 2500-2750(maybe that’s not mega enough)…but it breaks down into communities of 20-75 people…those communities go out and serve in the community and meet needs of people…the church also does quarterly food drives for the local food bank…we support the local homeless shelter and take part in a local ministry to homeless families…we sponsor foreign missionaries(one came from the church) and an orphanage…we send people on foreign missions in addition to the “intown” missions team that goes out each month…
i also like fred’s point on stewardship…how big of a role does that play?
“Growth does not mean it gets bigger.
My dad’s church grew all the time but the attendance stayed the same.”
Well put.
‘Modern’ American culture also promotes bigger is better…build it and they will come. If you’re expanding, that means you’re sucessful. From the outside perspective, average people may be drawn to bigger churches with nice interior, multi million dollar equipments, etc..and have a great ‘worship and praise’ experience.
I’m not saying mega/big churches are bad as I am sure bigger churches can reach people in a different way than smaller church can AND vice versa. You’ll always have people come and go from big to small and also the other way around.
I still go to my church (that I have attended for the past 12 years), but just like Derek said, one of the problems with bigger churches is that many people come to be a passive participant. A few really go to church to fellowship and establish friendships with others unless you are already connected in some ways, or just happen to ‘click’ with the people. It’s not bad or good…and it’s not a criticism of bigger church (as a matter of fact I DO have friends at the big church where I attend).I am temporarily branching out to a smaller church. Things are definitely different…no high-tech sound system, I have to bring my own instrument all the time, no high-tech monitor, but out of all the things that are lacking, I am hoping to actually slow myself down from the fast pace of the big church to really focus less on the production side of the church and to focus more on fellowshiping with others…at least that’s my idealistic personal views.
thks, jon .. man, I keep feeling like I have to say over and over .. I’m not in ANY WAY suggesting that “all small churches” are “small” because of bad stewardship …. I’m just saying, sometimes, that principle “could” be at work … OK, enough disclaimers.
@Becky I don’t think that being involved in a movement of God requires that you eliminate going to a mega church. I think that we were created to be plugged into:
A larger group celebration type gathering (large is subjective.)
A mid sized missional community, one that focuses on loving our community through acts of service
A small accountability group where we can really open up and share our stuff
There is a place for a large gathering I believe. It just can’t be a hiding place for people to placate their conscience. We need to rethink the model and not just throw it all away.
i have a dear friend that pastors a church of 300…he has 12 that do pretty much everything that needs to be done in the place…passively sitting there…their stewardship issue has nothing to do with money…it’s with time, gifts, abilities…i don’t see how they stay open? but it has nothing to do with other churches robbing them!
I don’t think size & stewardship are always related (as you said).
Sometimes, but not always.
I have seen with my own eyes big churches with crap financial responsibility.
And I have seen tiny churches with amazing stewardship.
And vice versa.
one key, regardless of size is to get people on board with a missional mindset, whether that’s in your home town or accross the world…big responsibility for the leaders!!!
*gasp*
Anne said ‘crap’!
lol :)
btw: I like this topic. Good post. Sincerely.
Yeah. And if we’re the body of Christ, why are we letting some members of the body starve to death?
I think my church does a great job of reaching out to other churches in our city. We have a monthly prayer time called “City Prayer” where we pray for Denver. Offerings are often taken up for hurting churches and pastors. I love to see that kind of community.
Stop on by if you’re in the Denver area: last Saturday of every month, 9:00 am (i’ll be singing next sat.) http://www.orcconline.org
Jon, let me know how the idea of mutual edification as described by Paul in his letters plays out, in any way, in your church gatherings of multiple thousands of people.
I’m not holding my breath on an answer.
I’m not against large gatherings of worshippers. I’m against those types of gatherings being the defining characteristic of the gatherings of the local church. Because the types of interactions described in the NT simply aren’t possible on that scale.
Derek,
Agreed – I think *ANY* church of any size needs to have smaller pods of community – whether you call that “home group”, “small group”, “life group”, “cells”, etc.
You are right – there is no way to have active “body” participation (is this what you mean by “mutual edification”?) in a huge, large group. However, in a small group, say 10 or less … this is the cornerstone of such meetings.
Large or small … even if a church has 100 attendees, I’d think they should be facilitating and leading environments where small groups are available with active participation.
Are we preparing them as a church though?
What I mean is, we can give and give and give to the lost, sick, poor, hungry(and all of that is GREAT, honestly). However, once that is gone, they are left with nothing again.
To me I guess it’s not as much about the HUGE church as much as it’s about what are we doing to not just feed the hungry now, but help them to help themselves in the long run. We have to prepare and give them life, not just give them food. (we can still give them food)
Just my thoughts.
http://www.vagabondrunn.wordpress.com
Actually, Fred, it’s just as easy for groups of 10 to rely on a single leader as it is in a group of 1000. Especially if those 10 people have been trained, their whole lives, to sit in church and be quiet (except for when they follow the professional singer).
I say this because it’s extremely difficult to take the path that Paul describes in Corinthians. And not as a side project (as small groups or cells always are), but as the normative functioning of the church, as clearly prescribed in the NT.
Honestly, I no longer count the typical Sunday school or Bible study discussion as satisfying the area of mutual edification. Small groups are a patch to a bigger problem. I’m talking about God leading multiple people to share spontaneously in a gathering. I’m talking about confession of sins, praying for each other and laying hands on each other for healing. I’m talking about clearly seeing God move through a gathering, not as a result of any man’s planning.
And you can do all of this in living rooms. And take the millions of dollars and give it to those who need it. (To bring this back on topic.)
I haven’t blogged/posted much about what I call the “Winnipeg Anomaly” since the days of the mystic (remember those days, Anne?)…
But it fits this discussiona bit. The “Anomaly” refers to unusual levels of relationship, cooperation and even flow of resources amongst many of churches here. Here where I live in Winnipeg the atmosphere is such that it wasn’t a suprise (but a huge, humbling blessing, to be sure) when another church in the city contributed significant finances to help us finish our children’s and youth centre.
There is of course always room to grow more in this.
I think realistically-speaking the potential of resource flow/sharing has it’s greatest potential in the context of relationship.
There is incredible relationship among many of the churches in Winnipeg. So it seems to me that the first step is building relationships… and then resources, encouragement and other kinds of help can flow more organically and naturally.
While on the whole I would agree that resources aren’t being shared… I also think that there is a lot more of this going on than we probably realize. And the fact that we aren’t aware makes me wish there was a wide-spread format for sharing and celebrating stories of churches helping churches.
(Maybe Anne you start a new category here and we the Flowerdust faithful feed you the stories we come across – or hey maybe that’s a concept for your next book? Inspiring stories of it happening, a prophetic call to the Church to make it happen, and practical ways to help it happen.)
I know the Willow Creek Association does a lot to support small churches. I know Lifechurch.tv shares resources like crazy. Mosaic helps other churches, Saddleback’s small groups support churches in Africa, etc.
And I’m sure there are lots of smaller stories out there.
the normative function in our church has nothing to do with the service on sunday…but to do with the groups that meet every day of the week…in the case of our group, multiple times in the week…we’ve clearly seen God move and work in our group and transform lives…free people from addictions…but because that happened in a church building it’s a bad thing? because the living room and the house didn’t cost millions…it’s better?
maybe instead of spending money on computers and cell phones so we could blog…we could use the money to feed people??? maybe we could have used all of this time to be out serving others??? we could do this all day…
another light topic, huh? :)
in short: no, i would not contend that churches are robbing one another.
Acts 2 certainly reveals a model of living that should be replicated. sadly, its application gets complicated in our 21st century world vice first century Palestine – mainly because of denominations (to say nothing of the divide between Orthodox, Protestant, and Catholic).
at the risk of backlash, i will say this: just because a group of folks (even with genuine hearts) makes the decision to plant a church, does not mean that decision is in line with God’s redemptive plan. perhaps a certain church did not thrive because its teaching/leadership/shepherding was counter to Scriptural truth and Christ’s example.
yes, we should be saddened for participants in that body who are left searching for a new home. but…but…maybe they end up connected with a community that truly is a reflection of God’s best.
i think Matthew 25 can shed some light on this. that passage reminds us that God is a perfect steward of His gifts and blessings. perhaps those who find a ministry is not thriving are not appropriately entrustable with that mantle.
so…i am not suggesting that the above words speak to all situations. i do, though, think it helps us understand what we see around us.
:claps at John:
I was reading reading reading and got to the very end here. And all if have to add is:
Bravo John
great reply, John … and for “jon” – “house church”, ’nuff said. I think that model can be awesome, and although I know lots of folks in larger churches or organized “church” that really enjoy “house church” meetings, I’ve never met a die-hard “house church” person who had ANYTHING really edifying to say about an organized church meeting as an ‘entity’ in a building …, sadly enough.
What I don’t like about church budgets is that the highest priority on them is the children’s ministry. That is a worthy cause to throw money at, but I think churches could be far more outward focused. People are still starving and dying of unclean water out there.
Funny thing about this post… I have been looking through Revelations a little bit lately… I just felt drawn there… not for doom and gloom, but to understand. Something that has stood out lately is Rev. 2:1-11. The church of Ephesus forgot what made it great…They basically turned from an outward facing church, to one that focused only on the local community. They forgot about their passion and God called them on it.
My question is – are some of the small churches doing an “Ephesus” thing? I don’t know – just another perspective.
:)
its a fair question when reading a post like Spence linked to. absolutely. but you’re not speaking about those things. you’re asking us about the small church across the street with the children’s guy making $75/week. you’re not going to convince me that churches shouldn’t be large. perhaps i’m playing devil’s advocate here, but don’t you work for one of the largest churches in the nation? thus, are one of those multi-million-dollar facilities across the street from the guy making $75/week? where’s the balance? i have no idea, but if these big churches are making the things Spence’s linked post talks about – brought into the light for others to see (who would normally only see on american idol) then i think the role of the church is being done. tall decaf lattes and all. it takes money to bring in money… even in ministry.
also, me liking what John said.
I mean the church GLOBAL. Inclusive of all churches world wide. The Church is not just in the USA.
And yup, I do work in a ginormous church with a big budget and lights and every single day I ask myself questions. If we don’t ask ourselves questions, well, I’m afraid we’d never grow or be challenged.
fair enough. thanks for the clarification.
absolutely The Church is not just in the USA, but those are the churches that are on display in this post. whether its for their size or for having too much money, too many lights, too much coffee… and oh yes, i ask those questions all the time on staff a church that’s “too big” – “is this new rug with our gianta$$ logo on it really necessary?” no, its not. but then i think ok wow, this is a church that is fully funding a church in thailand, india, mexico, south africa, inner city locally, south carolina… how is that not Acts 2? i think that’s what i’m getting at. i know this isn’t the norm, but its happening and instead of attacking – we should be coming along side and taking from the example and BE the church. believe it or not, i agree 100% with your post and the question you’re asking but again, playing devil’s advocate about maybe why it is the way it is.
While you refer to church GLOBAL, I’m more inclned to think church WESTERN in this particular discussion as I see the disparity referred to here as more uniquely an issue of the western church… at least in the sense that the western church is most likely the larger contributor to the disparity and maybe better positioned to level the ground compared to churches in non-western contexts.
Guilty as charged…but I’m dead set on turning this around.
As a preacher’s kid and now being married to a minister, my heart breaks when I see how some Christians treat other Christians. This would include how some churches treat their sister churches. I long for the day when we truly can be a global church versus all the bickering and back-biting and gossip, etc., etc., etc. that goes on. But will that ever occur? I doubt it!
Okay, I’m down to the bottom now and I think I’ve read it all. I agree with what John said too.
Interesting this discussion has turned slightly to church planting…
I know a family who moved thousands of miles away to plant a church for their denomination. They were there 6 months and he began to meet with the pastors of the other established churches in the area. They told him that they didn’t need a new church (something like 35 churches in a medium sized town), but they did need people to come alongside and support and pray and lead. The churches in the area were in need of a new burst of energy, something that the new family could offer. Our friends felt that this was something the Lord might have them do.
However, under pressure from their sending denomination, they were “forced” to start their own “church”. They are still a new church, but no doubt one of the ones pulling furniture off the side of the road.
Here’s another perspective…how come the “senior or preaching minister” always makes so much more than the youth minister? Don’t they work equally as hard?
great post…
Walmart or megachurch syndrome. those with all the resources suck up the resources that the tiniest of churche has left….that’s my simplistic viewpoint at this point.
rhett
To quote Anne:
“If we don’t ask ourselves questions, well, I’m afraid we’d never grow or be challenged.”
Wow – amen x10. Can you type that in extra large font that is BOLD AND STRONG ’cause that’s just da truth, girl. YES!
Amen… Amen…Amen… An i need to buy your book… Amen!
Yea. I work at a mega church as well. I just dont feel safe judging my pastors heart like most in this section are. I have so much to fix in my own finances before I can start pointing my finger at “the church”. Because according to Anne above, “We” are the church. the Global church.
But before I spend all my energy trying to fix the mega churches spending problem, er, not helping small churches problem, I should check my own.
I love blogs.
Los
1. Could stewardship be the answer? It could. But so could being “seeker friendly” instead of preaching the true Gospel.
2. As far as mega churches breaking down. I know the church I used to work at had maybe 1/3 of its rolls in ABF (Adult Bible Fellowship) groups. It is a good point that many came on Sunday to hear the pastor preach and the singer sing and did very little in the way of service either in the community or even in the church.
3. How many people go to mega churches to be entertained, or to feel a certain way. I think I will scream if I hear someone use the phrase “preparing the conregation to worship” when speaking of a worship leader or “setting the right mood” when talking about the service.
4. Something that bothers me is when ABF (or Sunday School or Small Groups) groups get so big that all you get is a teacher (my last church even called them that, teachers!) either repeating the sermon or teaching a “lesson” out of some book with only token input form the “class”. When your “small group” has 75 people in it that is ridiculous.
Mike
Is God’s Kingdom to receive finances in an equal manner? I’m not sure if this is a biblical concept. The parable of the talents…one, some, more.
However, this is a great question to stir around. I know we are to be stewards of the money that has been given. So as part of church leadership, i doubt that you would blindly give to a smaller church just to even out the resources. There needs to be some accountability.
Another thought…Maybe return on investment is a key factor in where resources end up going.
Last thought, I come from a small church (200) and I have never thought that a bigger church owed me resources or needed to share their money with us.
Are smaller churches jealous of other churches having more money? A jealous church needs to do a little inward heart/attitude check.
ok…enough rambling…
Because …
:(
Oh wait that isn’t how it goes, but how do you know unless your willing to do a 180, eh?
;)
So you know…it is kind of ironic to read all of these, not because of the irony- but because of the sad. (and this is actually true) just this morning I got a message from somebody telling me that they were in financial “distress” so their tithe and funding for Daniel and I were (of course) cut short this month. I didn’t respond. What was I supposed to say? Those monies are our live line out here. That is how we feed 700 kids a day. But I can’t say that…not to that person on the other side of the world, whom we are ministering to as well.…so I don’t know what the solutions are for any of the madness you are all talking about on this post, as we (my husband and I) are no longer a part of church buildings but reside on the other side of the globe in South Africa. But I can tell you matter of factly from some of the people or churches represented by the people who commented on this post that churches most of the time (if at all) support global missions. They say they do, and they might throw some money here and there…but most of the time youth, children’s, woman’s, men’s, and all the other ministries come first. (I am not implying that missions is any more or less important)I am just saying that by what I have seen, or experienced…it simply isn’t. We have heard so many times… “I am so sorry” at least every other week from somebody who has the desire to give or by somebody who works at a church but is constrained by the politics of their mega-church doctrine to missions. Their normal response? “I am so sorry; we only give to those who attend our church”. But we have to believe that God will provide, right? He called us here to serve these kids and so when the time comes to come home because there is no more money…I wonder if people will step up…or if we will just be another mission casualty. Scary thought. But I am completely convinced that until people give real prayer, real money, real time, real sacrifice, real investment into the lives of others…nothing is ever going to change. So in case you are wondering…or if you are still reading, and want to know the coming and goings of a mission life…why all the drawing from so many churches? The largest “donation” we receive is $250 a month from a church. For us, gas here is $6.00 a gallon so that doesn’t even cover our gas each month and we only have 4 churches who give. So please, if you have solutions…(because I have more pressing things to think about then where our support is coming from) let me know.
….and just about the time we think we’re growing, someone (literally) gets MAD and leaves the church. Why did they leave? It’s usually because they have an attitude of “well, no one is going to tell me what to do” and are MAD at the Pastor (which is my husband)and the whole truth of the matter is once the “it’s all about me/me/me/” attitude that sets in and my husband goes verse by verse teaching the Word! Are they MAD at God but want to spread their venum to get the Pastor discouraged. The only difference, it’s noticed more in a small church than a mega church. The plea, please pray for the Pastor because when someone leaves, I know my husband’s heart is so broken. Thank all of you for your comments; so very encouraging to us and Anne this all makes so much sense, so please keep on keeping on. Bless you for caring and your rays of hope!
Sounds like a good topic for a book…..
“the normative function in our church has nothing to do with the service on sunday…but to do with the groups that meet every day of the week…in the case of our group, multiple times in the week…we’ve clearly seen God move and work in our group and transform lives…free people from addictions…but because that happened in a church building it’s a bad thing? because the living room and the house didn’t cost millions…it’s better?”
jon… what the church practices on Sunday IS normative. It’s the primary way churches train the people who come. And what people learn in this environment is to passively receive teaching (and yes, entertainment).
Let me ask you a question… what is the percentage of folks who come on Sundays that participate regularly in small groups? Most large churches I know struggle with that. Cell churches are usually better, but they are so hierarchical that it creates different problems.
I’m not saying good things can’t happen in an organized service or that good things can’t happen in a small group setting. I’m saying that the best things about those things points us to a more organic model of church described in the NT. And once you start down that path, and truly try to follow what God laid out for us in scripture, you see more and more that the heavily organized, budgeted, resource-hungry church building-focused corporation is a drag on the church as she is supposed to be.
That’s why I say small groups are a patch. Can you take your small group, just as it is, and just make it the church? What if all of those people gave their money to causes that directly aided people instead of fueling the building and salary costs of the larger church? Can you imagine the impact our churches could have if we all made that a priority?
In my own personal life, moving towards house/organic church has meant that instead of giving my tithe to fund salary and pay off a mortgage (and this church was only about 100 people with about $200,000 debt), instead I fund the monthly expenses for an home in India, that has taken in 10 kids brought in from orphanages and sexual slavery.
This is the kind of stuff that is possible, on a personal level, when we quit justifying the massive expense that organized churches require.
I think many Christians fall into the comparison game. When it is all said and done, each church body / leaders will have to answer for how they handled what they were blessed with here on earth.
For those of us who aren’t pastors / teachers, I believe we need to understand one thing from the beginning – just because they are leaders doesn’t mean they automatically do everything correctly. That includes handling a budget. For those that sacrifice for Christ, but are given fewer blessings, maybe their eternal reward will be greater?
It’s all a result of the heart, not the outward appearance. Including an office or sanctuary. I’ve seen many churches with the newest furniture, computers, etc…..whose hearts fail to connect with God’s plan for them. Could go on forever, but I’ll just do what I’m commanded and let the Spirit handle the rest. Thanks Anne!
What wonderful conversation. What I think would be very interesting is not looking at “dollar for dollar”, but percentage …
For example, there’s this general rule that “bigger” churches have more “inactive people than “smaller ones”. Or “bigger churches” spend way more money on themselves, and their buildings, than “smaller churches” or “house churches”.
I’d love to see a study (c’mon, Barna) of PERCENTAGES, which tell the truth.
In my former church of >100, we had the same, small core group that was really active with everything. In my present church of 1500+, there is that same core group, it’s just much bigger. But I wonder if the “percentage” of total people would be the same?
As for giving … I wonder if our +10% intentional giving outside of our local church (local missions, foreign missions, feeding the hungry, clothing, benevolence, etc) is about the same “percentage” “per capita” as the living room group of 10 people.
Ultimately, I think Carlos hit the nail on the head … we should all examine ourselves really closely before we begin to judge other churches, ministries, etc … at the same time, as ANNE said, “asking these questions” is critical, and necessary.
For the Kingdom,
Fred
http://www.fredmckinnon.com
PS: I was going to say that Jesus probably wouldn’t hang around in this type debate very long, and wouldn’t care .. but then I thought about the widow’s mite … he definitely observed, he was definitely interested enough in the difference between the Pharisee and the widow, and their gift (and motive behind it) … enough that it made it’s way into the Bible!
derek…”what the church practices on Sunday IS normative”
normative = “conforming to or based on norms” thanks to http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/normative
for other churches your statement may be true, but in ours it’s not. the sunday morning gathering is not the norm of our church, just a piece. the norm is what happens throughout the week, not just that one time each week.
if nothing else, i know that i don’t have all the answers…and no offense neither do you…but i pray that God can use us all and that we are open to how He leads us and not how other men want us to go…
I mean normative in the sense that what is being taught to young Christians is that certain approaches to church are “normal.” And the most influential event at any organized church is the weekly worship service. That means, for your group, it is normative. What you do in that single gathering has the biggest impact on the way Christians will learn what church is supposed to be about. And the modern approach to this largely teaches Christians to be passive and to let the professionals do the work and develop the liturgy for everyone else to follow.
Perhaps the stuff you do throughout the week looks closer to what is described in Scripture, but in every organized church I’ve ever seen or heard about, the majority of the effort, energy, and focus is on the larger corporate gathering, which has no significant comparison to what is described in scripture. What scripture describes as typical only takes place in isolated settings in our churches today. Certain people feel that something is wrong, so they patch the system with something more relational, when the *whole system* is supposed to be totally different. The whole thing needs to be turned on it’s head if we’re hoping to conform the church to what is laid out for us in scripture.
I don’t have all the answers, either, but the shift in my thinking has been to quit justifying what I’m doing just because that’s the way it’s been done (or because it reaches people, for that matter), and to judge everything according to the principles laid out in the NT. Which has to do with mutual edification. Every-member-functioning during church gatherings. The priesthood of all believers. Letting God directly control the gathering through any individual believer. Taking our resources and using it for those in need. When compared against these principles and ideals, the modern church (and even most house churches, btw) fall very short indeed.
The reformation changed the church’s theology. It did not significantly alter the church’s practices. I’m not claiming to have this figured out, and in an organic approach there’s no one right, specific way any church will look. But if you believe in the principles I’ve talked about, you can’t help but question the things I’m questioning.
Rick Warren’s book wouldn’t have been as big of a hit if the first line wasn’t so powerful. It’s not about me!
We’re definitely not going to prove that God loves people differently, or blesses people in a biased manner. A mistake with money or possessions is simply our problem.
Luke 21:4 might help a bit – All these others made offerings that they’ll never miss; she gave extravagantly what she couldn’t afford—she gave her all!
Christ understood, and He definitely understands today. When a pastor has an office that he isn’t proud of, but a heart that will last for eternity. It’s all about giving, not getting.
The funny thing about Rick Warrens book (with all due respect, absolutely) is that it ended up being “all about me.” :)
… because the churches are not united in one purpose. all following their own callings and pursuing their own ministry.
That’s an awesome question. I think it’s because churches have become divided because of some of their theology. Things that aren’t even crucial to salvation – non-essential things. I heard on the radio that rather than debate issues, we divide over issues. How true. I notice it particularly between Baptists and Pentecostals. Over the year, I’ve attended both types of churches, so I can say that with confidence. For example, I now attend a Foursquare church, and they have an awesome youth ministry. When they hold events, they invite other churches in the community. But, one Baptist church, in particular, won’t associate with us because they think we’re “off” on our theology. Some of the people from that Baptist church don’t even know what theology that is – they just accept what the their church leaders tell them and look down on any other church different from their own. It’s dumb to me.
The issue with the whole “house church” vs. “established church” debate is that it’s often overlooked that they met in homes AND in the temple. My questions is, why did they do both? What happened when they were in the Temple? Were they taught? Was there any purpose for them being there or was it just a waste of time?
The Temple was a public place. The most appropriate parallel to today’s world would be a mall or a park, though in a park you could worship openly without pissing off any businesses.
The point is that the early Christian’s didn’t *build* temples. Which was quite unique compared to other religions of the day. And it only lasted a couple hundred years, until about the same time that the idea of “clergy” (professionalized ministry, separating people from God) was introduced as well.
Hot topic! I guess there’s not much more I could add that hasn’t been said. But I wanted to contribute to this long chain of responses! ;0
Derek, I really liked your response.
I can say that sometimes mega churches have mega debt as well as mega people. This is not always the case (disclaimer). However because of big spending, sometimes they do not have the money to give because they are spent out financially. This is not true in all cases (disclaimer again).
I also remember being part of a church plant and talking with other churches about funding our plant. Let’s just say that is not a good fund raising strategy :)
Good dialog overall and it really makes you think.
I should also point out that when the Christians went to worship at the temple, I’m quite sure that they were pissing off the religious elite of the day while they were doing it. Remember, they were doing that right in the faces of the guys who sent their messiah to the cross.
Perhaps the best analogy would be for persecuted Christians in China, meeting in house churches, to worship in Tiananmen Square.
All in all, I don’t think that worshipping in the outer temple court has any correlation with the “safe” Sunday worship service in a church building. Quite the contrary.
uh – i remember hearing somewhere that king david and others built some pretty cool digs in which to worship, then there was this guy named Abraham, now he lived in total poverty and he gave his children’s inheritance to God (yeah right – can you say iraq, iran, persia, syria, saudi arabia, etc?)
no problem at all w/ mega buildings, gold floors, 7 $ figure pastor salaries and planes.
If God doesn’t like it I can guarantee you He will change it – snap
we pontificate absolutely the most amazing things as mere mortals – God is chuckling at this one
anne – you may need to re-read mr warren’s book
Tongue in cheek. Tongue in cheek.
The huge mega-church and the penny-pinching pastor are both used by God. Maybe in different ways, but both for the same end.
So… tony… do you really want to live under the old law? Under the old covenant? That’s funny, because I was pretty sure Christ was ushering in a new covenant.
derek – if though shalt not kill is part of the old law – then heck yes bubba
btw – what does a building have to do with the old law – geesh, read the bible dude, read the bible
anne – have a good trip and say hi to Dolly!
i got it :)
You know today was one of the first days I really, really thought about it. I visited a church of 17 that had recently been robbed/vandalized with the pastor’s windows busted out. I asked the woman who went there if they were going to fix them & she said no b.c. they had no money, and then went into a list of other things that the church would not buy for their youth etc. She then was confused as to why the mega church (which I went to) down the road had a huge building and so much money. She said ” The people at ____ have money, at our church we all give what we can.” I then asked if they ever talk about tithing & they said they didn’t. The mega church has been through “The Blessed Life,” and make it very fundamental. The mega church reaches the community in a HUGE way, but I know the busted window church doesn’t… Is the mega church responsible for restoring a church that isn’t loving others the way it should? I didn’t know what to tell her :/
The person who thinks about it…prays about it…does something about it. If nobody’s doing it and you think it should be done…maybe you’re the person for the job. (there, the gauntlet has been thrown down)
By the way, I invite anybody to visit my blog.
Anne, this is a great question to ask of many pastors, some of whom may even be referred to in your book. Pastors like Bill Hybels, Rick Warren, Perry Noble, Tony Morgan, Tim Stevens and so on. Are they really following the example given to us of the true New Testament church?
Tom
startworship.blogspot.com
Tom (previous reply)
This is a terrible and leading question. This question pits small churches against large churches, implying that large churches are doing something wrong in having building programs, modern equipment, finances, resources, etc. and implying that large churches are bad for not subsidizing small churches. If a churches mission is to reach the people in their community for Christ and they are seeing 100’s of people make faith decisions, marriages healed, addictions over come, etc. etc, on a yearly, monthly, even a weekly basis, and they have a choice of building new facilities to reach more people or “equally distributing” the funds they would use for those projects to instead give it to a bunch of little church who are not doing any of those things is bad stewardship.
The premise that there is something wrong with small churches that struggle or with large church that are making a big impact for the kingdom. It also implies that if one church is growing that it must be at the expense of another. What I have seen in studying churches is that there is a reason large churches are large and small churches are small, be it philosophy, mission, leadership, vision, or lack of those things. Different is not wrong just different. I have been at mega churches, medium churches and small churches. Each fills a niche, each serves a purpose and reaches a segment of the people in it’s community.
Pastors like Bill Hybels, Rick Warren, Perry Noble, Tony Morgan, Tim Stevens and so on are following the New Testament and fulfilling the great commission. Large churches like the ones these men pastor do a lot for small churches in leadership, guidance, but it is not the job of large church to finances and float small struggling churches.
Questions like Anne’s tend to polarize the church and take the focus off our mission of reaching this world for Christ and shift believers focus to being jealous, envious, and resentful of churches that are larger and have more resources than they do.
I’d pose the question is another way: Why do some people, some very good people who love Christ with their hearts/minds/bodies die horrible deaths or live in poverty while some very bad people live the ‘good’ life…
My answer is this: I don’t know. God does and that should be good enough for me. It isn’t most of the time, but it should be all of the time.