Back in the 1980’s one of the most popular books on management making the rounds was In Search of Excellence by Peters and Waterman. Not long after the book was published, several of the ‘excellent’ companies they wrote about ran into trouble. Some of the principles and ideas discussed in the book have since fallen from favor, too, but one of them has intrigued me from the time I first read it.

Scaling down for growth

The authors wrote that many of the excellent companies ignored theoretical economies of scale and deliberately designed their systems and plants to be sub-optimal. It turns out that by keeping things small, these companies were able to achieve efficiencies which more than made up for any economy of scale. They reported that things started to go wrong whenever there were more than about 1,000 people under one roof.

As I recall, it was around this same time-frame when the church-growth movement really took off. Seemed like everybody started talking about how to boost attendance, membership campaigns and the need to build bigger facilities. The drive toward the mega-church was on.

Along with everybody else, I attended workshops and seminars that were supposed to tell us how to make it all happen. I was probably as caught up in the excitement as anybody. Yet, that figure of 1,000 people continued to haunt me. Was it possible for a congregation to get too large? Was there a point where friction and inertia overcame the advantages of a large body count in the pew? I recall making the suggestion that when a congregation got to about 500-600 maybe it would be best for it to hive off a separate group of 200 or so instead of trying to grow larger.

A glass ceiling

In truth, though, the question was largely academic. In spite of best intentions and efforts, most of the congregations I knew remained small. It seemed impossible to grow much past the 100 mark. In the arrogance of youth I laid much of the blame on inept leadership. To my critical eyes, the reason for the failure to grow beyond a certain point was that most church leaders were woefully ignorant of the basics of management. As if I, who had never had to manage anyone, knew anything about it!

Time moved on. So did I. I left a small congregation which had plateaued for a much larger, growing one in a different city. Through various circumstances, the Lord knocked some of arrogance out of me. I also found out that large congregations can start having serious trouble long before the 1,000 member mark is reached, or even the 500-600 I had proposed. If there was an ideal size, I had not yet observed it.

Re-thinking

Fast forward 20 years. The Lord called me and my family to be part of the leadership team in a new church plant. Suddenly, the issue of church size became an issue again. Were we going to embrace the mega-church concept, or would we choose a different model? For many reasons we deliberately chose to keep the size of the congregation relatively small. How small? We didn’t know, but decided to grow by multiplying congregations rather than trying to increase congregation size beyond a certain point – whatever that point is.

Is there an ideal congregation size? At what point should a congregation spawn a new one? A while back, my brother-in-law sent me an email in which he passed on the tidbit that Reuel Lemmons (a well-known leader among the Churches of Christ) had said that beyond a size of 150 we can’t know everyone very well. The implication was that congregations should be somewhat smaller than that. Since my b.-in-l. was unable to provide references and Lemmons is dead, that was little more than an interesting factoid. Then, I read the book, Radical Restoration by F. LaGard Smith. (An excellent and provocative read, by the way.) In it he, too, mentions the figure of 150 and, more importantly, gave a source: The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell, who, in turn, draws on the studies of Robin Dunbar.

Channel overload

The key insight is that we are only able to handle a limited amount of information before our minds are overloaded. In social contexts, on average, we can only handle about 150 channels of communication and/or interaction. In other words, we are capable of relating to only about 150 people well, and knowing them in the sense of how they are interconnected to us and with one another. Beyond that number, interaction and communication breaks down.

Something which concerns me is the sheer number of references pointing to Dunbar’s work. Now that I know the source, it seems like references to the “Rule of 150” are popping up everywhere. It feels like everyone is jumping on this single-source bandwagon. It has the feel of a fad about it. Frankly, I’m skeptical of Dunbar’s theories. Anything which is based on evolutionary psychology and the relative sizes of primate brains raises a red flag or two. But even if Dunbar’s theories prove to be pure hokum, that doesn’t invalidate the observations about the limitations of social channels. We all know that relationships start to break down within a group at a certain level. That fact remains even if the speculation about how the fact came about is moonshine. The real question is where that breakdown begins. Is 150 the right number? It feels right. I would feel a lot more comfortable if there were more independent confirmation but, I’m willing to accept the number of 150 pending further inquiry.

Adding complexity

“Hold it!,” you say. “If this number of 150 is so all-fired important, then how come so many groups exist which are larger than 150? What keeps them together?” It’s not that groups larger than 150 can’t exist. Obviously, they do. But Gladwell points out that the number of 150 is really a point of complexity. Below it, we can keep track of one another informally. Above it, we must introduce systems and procedures in order to function smoothly. If he is correct, this is a major reason why so many congregations find it impossible to grow much beyond 100 or so. They simply have not developed, and put in place, the organization which will allow them to. There are a lot of other factors which have a bearing on growth, but that’s a subject for another blog.

A practical consideration

If the observation about the limits on social relationships is correct, it sheds light on something which has often been commented on in many congregations. Christians should be reaching out to their friends and acquaintances with the gospel message. Yet it seems that most Christians become ineffective in reaching others within a few years after their own conversion. Is it possible that as a new convert becomes more and more integrated into the church that we overwhelm his social capacity? He has no room left for relationships outside the church body. Since he has no relationships his influence is minimized. If this is true, it is a powerful argument for keeping the size of congregations relatively small.

Acting as a body

There’s another practical implication of this social channel limit business. Gladwell points out that a group has what the psychologists call “transactive memory.” That is, we remember more as a group than we do individually. We rely on others to fill in the details we have forgotten. The same is true of skills and talents. When everyone knows everyone else, tasks are naturally delegated to those who are best suited to perform them. When you need an answer, or you need something done, you know who to go to. But what happens if the group is too large? The social and relational connections are broken. You no longer know everyone, and because you don’t, you no longer know who to go to for help.

After pondering this a bit, I couldn’t help but think of what Paul wrote in 1st Corinthians 12. There Paul compares the church to a body made up of many different, yet interdependent, parts. The eye is not the same as the hand, and both need the other in order to function properly. But what happens if the eye doesn’t know about the hand? How can they possibly work together as a body? The implication is startling: If a congregation is going to function as a body, we must keep its size within our social channel capacity. The natural upper limit, seems to be about 150 people.

The Jerusalem church

Come now! If all this is so, what about the early church? 3,000 people were added to the church in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost alone. Okay, let’s look at it. We tend to think of the church in Jerusalem as one big, monolithic, entity. It’s true that at least for a while the church met in the temple courts. But there is something else which didn’t really make an impression on me until I started thinking about this thing of limits. Not only did they meet in the temple courts, they also broke bread in their homes. (Acts 2:46) This implies that the larger group was actually composed of many small ones. How many and how small? Who knows? But if the groups averaged 50 people, just 60 groups would have accommodated the entire 3,000 converts. 50 people in one home? Those who have grown up in the West have a hard time imagining it, but I’ve often seen that many gathered in one small home in the East. Hey, we once crammed 21 people into a Jeep station-wagon! Well, what about leaders for these groups? The 120 believers which met before Pentecost had been taught directly by Christ. It’s more than likely that a number of them were among those Christ sent out on preaching tours. Under the oversight of the Apostles, these believers could easily have provided the leadership the various groups needed. Another source of leaders was the converts, themselves. There must have many men of high caliber among them – men such as Philip and Stephen. Acts 6:7 says that a large number of priests were converted, also. Here were competent men, already highly trained in the Scriptures, who could have stepped into leadership roles almost immediately. As I think about it, it seems very likely that the church in Jerusalem was able to easily keep below the 150 people limit by constantly adding small groups.

Lower limits and the military metaphor

If there is a natural upper limit to congregation size, is there also a lower limit? We don’t like to think so. After all, Jesus said He would be with even 2 or 3 who gather in His name. (Matthew 18:20) Yet, unless those 2 or 3 are extra-ordinarily gifted, it is hard to imagine them as a fully functioning body. Another scriptural metaphor for the church may shed some light on the question of a effective lower size limit for a congregation. Christians are called soldiers. So, what can we learn from the size of military units? Ancient armies were often organized by multiples of ten. For example, in both the Roman and Mongol armies, the smallest unit was composed of 10 men. Ten of these units formed the next grouping, and so on. In the modern US army, the smallest unit capable of independent movement is the platoon. Light infantry platoons are composed of 3 squads of 10 men. Based on this, which is the distilled wisdom from thousands of years of practical experience, it is tempting to say that a congregation less than 30 is not viable. At the least, it is probably too small to be stable, or effective. This may be why so many house churches don’t seem to live up to their promise.

Interestingly, a company in the US army, which is the basic military unit which can perform a battlefield function on its own, is composed of 100 to 200 men. This fits amazingly well with the notion of the “Rule of 150.” A company is generally small enough for everybody to know each other and everybody’s capabilities. Even those companies which are larger than 150 can function well because of the structure and organization imposed on military units. They have compensated for the limitations of our ability to form natural, informal relationships with large numbers of people, by adding structure.

Summary

Does structure, or context, affect the size of congregations? Yes, but that’s for a different entry. For now, I’ll just go on record to say that a congregation should probably be larger than 30 people, but not more than 150. When it grows to about 120 or so, it should begin to plan seriously to multiply by dividing itself.

Wherein PresbyterJon lists some of the books he’s been reading…

One of my vices is reading. No, I didn’t say that I read vice! Reading, itself, can easily turn into a vice for me. You see, I read not only to get information and to continue learning but, for me, reading is a great pleasure. It’s my preferred method of relaxing and getting my mind off of problems and difficulties. Of course reading can be a great help in finding solutions to problems, and a lot of my reading is for that purpose. But it’s the pleasure part that gets me in trouble. I find myself letting books get in the way of doing work I ought to be doing. There are times when I have to consciously avoid visiting the library lest I be tempted to neglect necessary tasks. Fortunately, I’ve been blessed with the ability to read quickly.

The blessing of books

Over the years I’ve had many opportunities to think about the incredible blessing of books. Have you ever wondered what our world would be like without the invention of movable type? It was movable type which made the printing of inexpensive books possible. Without inexpensive books, only the wealthy would have access to much of the information in the world. We would be far less informed and far less able to verify what we’re told.

Movable type and literacy

Not only did the invention of movable type make the printing of books inexpensive, and therefore the availability of books widespread, it also had a profound effect on literacy. This goes deeper than simply making books widely available. Have you ever stopped to think about systems of writing and the impact of technology upon them? The English language is blessed with a relatively simple alphabet of only 26 characters. If you include both upper and lower case letters, numbers and punctuation, the entire English writing system can easily be represented by just 94 or so distinct characters. This is not so in other traditions. The writing system in the area of Asia in which I grew up consists of some 39 letters – depending on how you count them. English spelling may be crazy, but how would you like to have to contend with 4 different Zs? While it does not have the concept of upper and lower case, the shape of most letters changes depending on the location in a word. Some letters must connect to the letter on either side. Some may not, or only connect on one side. To complicate matters the vertical placement of the start of a word depends on the first letter and how long the word is. In some cases, some letters have descenders while in other cases they don’t. And don’t get me started on diacritical marks! (Some vowels are distinct letters, while others are only indicated by diacritics.)

I’ve never been able to compute the number of possible permutations of letter shapes, but it is probably in the 100’s of thousands if not millions. Yes, there are mono-spaced fonts based on compromised initial, middle and final shapes for each letter but, as a general rule, they look rather hideous. Is it any wonder that, until recently, the majority of books and newspapers in this language were hand-written by calligraphers? Is it any wonder that decent word-processors for this writing system weren’t developed for a couple of decades after they became common-place in English speaking countries? The word-processors are based on ligatures rather than discrete letters. The best of them boast some 15 to 20 thousand ligatures and, I can tell you from my own experience, that it is still far too few. I often run into letter combinations which just don’t look right.

Now think about the practical implications. I’m convinced that one of the major factors for why literacy is still so low in the area I grew up is the complexity of the writing system. It’s not a trivial task to learn it. It’s one reason why comparatively so few books and other material are written. It’s also one reason why the English language is becoming so universal – the writing system is simply much easier to deal with.

Though the English alphabet never was as complicated as the one I’ve mentioned, the invention of movable type is partially responsible for its simplicity. Our writing system was simplified to compensate for the limitations of the technology. To a certain extent, beauty was sacrificed to utility and, because people were willing to make that trade-off, mankind has been immensely blessed by the rapid spread of knowledge. It has also given innumerable people an outlet for self-expression. If someone has something to say, he has a far greater chance to put it in a form other people can access.

Library access

The catch is whether people really can access it. The production of inexpensive books is only part of the equation. Unless the books are distributed, they do little good. Even if a book is inexpensive, it still won’t be widely read if people can’t afford to buy it. For most of history, books, no matter how inexpensive, have been a luxury. It really wasn’t until the 20th century that most people in the West could afford to buy many books. But there was something else which made a huge difference, at least here in the US. No matter what you think of the the so-called “Robber barons” of the last half of the 19th and early 20th centuries, we owe a lot to them. Yes, they were manipulative. Yes, they exploited. Yes, they can be accused of unfair labor practices – and all the rest of it. Yet, it has to be said that they amassed their personal empires and fortunes not so much by destroying, as so many have done throughout history, but by building up the infrastructure of this country. As despicable as some of their actions may have been, they laid the industrial and financial foundations of our present society. They also did something else. After they had amassed their fortunes, most of them turned to philanthropy. Part of that involved endowing libraries. All across this nation there are public libraries which came into existence because wealthy people decided it was important that ordinary folk, people who could not afford to buy them, have access to books. Those libraries have helped educate whole generations. Those libraries have enabled generations to dream and to pursue opportunities which, otherwise, they might not have known even existed.

Libraries and trust

Libraries by themselves, however, do not ensure the wide distribution of knowledge. There is another factor. Without that factor the libraries would soon be forced to close or drastically alter their methods of operation. In fact, libraries as we know them, could not exist in the country in which I grew up. What’s the factor? It’s called, trust. It’s a basic respect for the property of others. It’s recognizing that others have just as much right to access as I do. Think about it. When I walk into a library, no one checks to make sure I have a card giving me the right to be there. I can take as many books off the shelf as I want. (The last time I checked, the number of books one person could check out was so ridiculously high that, in effect, there is no upper limit.) They let me take the books home. No one inspects my bag as I walk out the door of the library to make sure that I’ve checked the books out. They trust me to let them know which books I’ve taken. They even allow me to check the books out of the library myself. They trust me to bring the books back. They don’t even hound me about paying the fines I’ve incurred by keeping books past the due date. Though there are many fine people in the country where I grew up, that kind of trust simply doesn’t exist in society as a whole. The books would disappear off the shelves, never to return, in short order. Because trust and integrity does exist in this society, library books have a wide circulation. Because most are willing to put the general good ahead of their own selfish desires, all benefit, not just a privileged few.

An even bigger revolution

Now, as big as the revolution brought about by the invention of movable type was, we’re in the middle of one which may prove even bigger. Let’s face it. Even though printing is cheaper than ever before, and the production of books is relatively inexpensive, it still takes quite a bit of money to print one – not to mention the expense of making any revisions! Also, regardless of whether they’ve brought it on themselves or not, a relatively small percentage of the world’s population has access to libraries. The Internet is in the process of changing all this. Not only is the Internet replacing physical objects (books you can hold in your hand) with something intangible (letters formed of light), it’s made it possible for more people than ever to have a voice and to have access to the voices of others. Hey, without the Internet, it’s highly unlikely you would ever hear of PresbyterJon, let alone read what he has to say! The Internet has brought us one step further out of the material world, and one step closer to mind communicating directly to mind – at least for those who use Western alphabets. (The Internet, and particularly the Web, was designed for English and other European fonts. Unfortunately, designing and maintaining a website in the writing system I mentioned earlier is a nightmare. To make it look halfway decent you have to first render text as a graphic rather than as discrete letters which can be assembled and rendered directly by the end-user’s browser. That means that once text has been written it can no longer be manipulated, corrected or changed unless you have access to the original. This severely constrains what can be done. I can only hope that the limitations of the technology will drive the same kind of simplification that movable type sparked for English.)

A book list

Wow! After chasing down that long rabbit-trail, let me just say that though I spend long hours in front of a computer screen; though I certainly am not blind to the benefits of the Web and the Internet, I still like the feel and utility of the real thing. I still like to lay down on the couch with a good book.

So what books has PresbyterJon read? There are far too many to list, but the following may be of interest to you:

Biblical Studies

A Shepherd Looks at Psalm 23 by Phillip Keller. An excellent and practical look at what is perhaps the most famous and best loved of the Psalms. Anyone aspiring to the work of Pastor should study this Psalm in order to gain a better understanding of what shepherding is all about. (The term ‘Pastor’ is also translated as Shepherd and, in New Testament usage, is equivalent to Elder or Presbyter.)

Hand Me Another Brick by Charles R. Swindoll. This is the best exposition of the book of Nehemiah I have ever read. It’s a ‘must read’ for anyone in leadership.

Decision Making and the Will of God by Garry Friesen with J. Robin Marson. This book helped me untangle a few things during a certain portion of my life. It’s the best discussion of biblical decision making that I know of.

What the Bible Says About Covenant by Mont W. Smith. This book was the first comprehensive treatment of the concept of covenant that I had ever read. It helped bring both the Old and New Covenants into perspective for me.

Heaven by Randy Alcorn. Christians tend to have a lot of misconceptions about heaven. This is a refreshing, and quite comprehensive, look at the subject. Very thought provoking and faith building. Not only is this a good read, I appreciate the author’s humility and frankness. Though he is candid about his premillenial beliefs, and there are several portions of the book which are colored by that viewpoint, he is not dogmatic about it and leaves open the possibility of being wrong.

As a general rule, I don’t recommend commentaries – at least to beginners. Not only do they promote laziness by encouraging students to short-circuit the process of studying things out for themselves, commentaries can be dangerous. A good many of them are written by scholars who do not believe some of the foundational truths of the Christian faith such as anything which involves miracles or predictive prophecy. Unless used with caution, commentaries can undermine faith. One exception to this is the College Press NIV Commentary. It’s an exegetical commentary, meaning that, while it attempts to give the meaning of each verse or passage, it does not go into many details of structure, grammar or the gamut of scholarly opinion. One of the strengths of this series is that, by and large, the doctrine is sound.

If you want a scholarly commentary, the best contemporary series I know of is the Word Commentary. It still must be used with caution but, in contrast to some series I could name, the scholarship is quite good and consistent from one volume to the next.

Revelation, Four Views edited by Steve Gregg. In spite of its title, Revelation remains a mystery to most. This book gives a good overview of the four major ways the book of Revelation has been interpreted.

Nobody Left Behind by David Vaughn Elliot. An important corrective to the doctrine of Dispensational Premillenialism which is so ingrained into popular evangelical thought. The title is a deliberate take-off on the ‘Left Behind’ novels.

Church

Radical Restoration by F. LaGard Smith. This book raises profound questions about many aspects of church tradition. I had already come to many of the same conclusions on my own, but Smith expresses it far better than I could. Well worth reading and thinking about – even if you don’t agree with the direction the author takes.

The Worldly Church by C. Leonard Allen, Richard T. Hughes and Michael R. Weed. This book exposes a number of the trends which are taking root in many of the churches with which I am acquainted. It not only identifies the vulnerabilities of those of us who trace our heritage to the Restoration Movement, but suggests correctives. This book is actually the middle one in a series of three. The other two are Discovering Our Roots and The Cruciform Church. Of the three, I found this one the most rewarding, though all three are worth reading.

Death of the Church by Mike Regele with Mark Schulz. A fascinating look at the waves of change which are about to engulf the church. The argument of the book is that the church, as we know it, must die and remake itself in order survive the next few decades. I was particularly intrigued by the discussion of inward and outward looking eras and the impact of generational cycles.

The Open Church by James H. Rutz. Though at times flippant, over simplified and written in a deliberately provocative style, this book presents a refreshing alternative to church as we know it. The author points out that much of what we do is not modeled after the church in the New Testament, but is left-over baggage from cultural and ecclesiastical practices which were brought into the church from the outside.

Missions

Missionary Methods: St. Paul’s or Ours? by Roland Allen. This one ought to be required reading for all church leaders, not just missionaries or those on missions committees. Along with my own experiences and observations, Allen has radically changed my thoughts and my approach to mission work. The book was first published in 1927 and was written in a formal style, so some may find the language a bit difficult to understand and plow through. Also, Allen was an Anglican and he wrote from the perspective of a hierarchical system that I don’t agree with. In spite of those caveats, it is a highly rewarding read. Though expressly written about mission, the principles are applicable in any church.

The Spontaneous Expansion of the Church and the Causes Which Hinder It by Roland Allen. This is the sequel to Missionary Methods. Though a harder read, it is also more provocative and hard-hitting. Allen raises a number of questions which are well worth thinking about.

I sort of grew up on Kipling. Though it is not primarily about missions, The Naulahka by Rudyard Kipling fills an important need. It does an excellent job of describing the culture shock which occurs when two diametrically opposed value systems come into contact. In spite of the differences, we can find understanding in our common humanity.

Anna and the King of Siam by Margaret Landon. Yes, this is the book upon which the Broadway musical and the movie The King and I, are based. Anna’s character and her actual role in the Kingdom of Siam have been the subject of much debate. But fairly recent discoveries of some long-lost letters written by the king to her, substantiate what Anna wrote about her time as a school teacher and royal secretary in the palace. I believe the accounts she wrote are true. This book is well worth reading. It’s an amazing testimony of the incredible impact one person can have in just a short time.

The Little Woman by Gladys Aylward as told to Christine Hunter. This is another story that tells about the influence one person who is sold out to God can have.

DMZ by Jeannette Windle. No one who has spent much time on the mission field comes back unchanged. The children of missionaries, in particular, often have a hard time adjusting to, accepting or even understanding the sacrifices and decisions their parents made. Written by a former missionary, this book is actually a thriller. Even somewhat of a techno-thriller. Aside from being an interesting (and clean!) read, what I appreciate about the book is that it confronts the questions and struggles that children of missionaries go though. I also appreciate the answer the book gives to those who claim that missionaries destroy and exploit other cultures.

History/Biography Related to Biblical Themes

Herod, Profile of a Tyrant by Samuel Sandmel. This book gave me a greater understanding, not only of a man who played a key role in the biblical story, but of the times just prior to Christ’s birth. It was helpful to understand the political context into which the Savior was born.

Mary Renault has written a trilogy about Alexander the Great and the period immediately following his death. The books are: Fire From Heaven, Persian Boy and Funeral Games. We sometimes forget, or don’t realize, how blessed we are by our heritage. We in the West live in an era and a culture that, no matter how badly it wishes to deny it, was shaped by Christian thought, ethics and morality. This trilogy should shock you. It helped me realize just how dark a world Christ was born into.

The Emperor Claudius is mentioned in Scripture (Acts 11:28, 18:2). Robert Graves has written a two-volume pseudo-autobiography of him. The books are I, Claudius and Claudius the God and Messalina His Wife. Both are excellent, though somewhat shocking, reads. They give valuable background information about the culture and political climate of the Roman Empire during the Apostolic period.

General Biography

It’s fascinating to read about what makes other people tick, particularly those who have had a major role in shaping our world. Here are some biographies and autobiographies I’ve enjoyed.

The Robber Barons; The Great American Capitalists, 1861-1901 by Matthew Josephson. A very interesting description of the men most responsible for building the industrial and financial infrastructure of the United States. Without a good understanding of these men and what they accomplished, it’s difficult to comprehend the United States of the 20th century.

Ford, The Men and the Machine by Robert Lacey. The Ford Motor Company is most famous for the production of the Model T automobile. Less known, but more important, Ford invented the moving production line which has dominated most industries since.

The Rockefellers by Peter Collier and David Horwitz. Most people probably know that the Rockefellers made their fortune in the oil industry. What many do not realize is their impact on the church. To a certain degree, anyway, the corporate form of church organization which is so prevalent today, can be traced back to the influence of this family.

Be My Guest by Conrad Hilton. The founder of the Hilton Hotel chain tells how it all began. One of the fascinating things about his story is the linking of faith to success as a businessman. I certainly don’t agree with the man’s theology, but it is refreshing to read a leading businessman insist on the need for total integrity.

Mover of Men and Mountains by R.G. LeTourneau. The man most responsible for totally changing the face of the earth-moving and logging industries tells his story. An incredible tale by someone who decided to totally dedicate his business to God.

Fantasy

There are many Christians who feel that fantasy is an unsuitable genre for godly people to read. They argue that it is wrong to let our minds dwell on things which aren’t real. The argument goes something like this: If it isn’t real, it isn’t true. If it isn’t true, it must be a lie and if it’s a lie, then it’s wrong. I strongly disagree with both the premise and the logic of the argument.

First, imagination is a God-given gift. In fact, if it weren’t for imagination, it would probably be very difficult, if not impossible, to have faith. “Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.” (Hebrews 11:1 NIV) It is our imagination which enables us to visualize those things we can’t see – in other words those things which we cannot prove to be real. Secondly, we use our imaginations to visualize concepts and ideas. The concepts and ideas may be very real, but we use the unreal as a means to understand them. This is the process Jesus used in the parables. He used something which was not real – in the sense that the stories He told had not actually happened – in order to explain or illustrate a real truth or concept. Thirdly, just because something isn’t real, doesn’t mean it’s a lie. As long as everybody knows that something isn’t real, then no falsehood is involved. Imagined things become a lie only if they are presented as being real or are accepted as real. Fantasy becomes wicked only if it is used to imagine or indulge in wicked things, or we allow it to divert us from doing God’s will. Having said that, here are some of my favorites:

Watership Down by Richard Adams. A thoroughly delightful book about the struggles of a colony of rabbits. The author uses the rabbits as a vehicle to discuss the virtues and vices of various forms of societies and governments. One of the most fascinating aspects of this book is the author’s, unstated but very present, theory of how story-telling and myth shapes society.

Another wonderful piece of imagination is The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis. One of the arguments used against Christianity is that a merciful and loving God would not send anyone to hell. In this book Lewis explores the concept and shows that hell is actually a choice which people freely make.

Lewis wrote 7 fantasies for children. I have read them countless times, even as an adult. In the stories, children from our world are transported into another one called Narnia. There, they go on quests, overcome evil and, most of all, come to know the great Lion, Aslan, who is representative of Christ. They learn to love Aslan in Narnia so they may know and love Him in our world. Not only are the books delightful, Christian concepts are never far beneath the surface. The books can be an excellent way to introduce these concepts and ideas in a non-threatening way. In chronological, rather than publication, order the 7 books are:

The Magician’s Nephew

The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe

The Horse and His Boy

Prince Caspian

The Voyage of the “Dawn Treader”

The Silver Chair

The Last Battle

Lewis writes that Phantastes by George MacDonald was one of the influences which eventually brought him to Christ. Frankly, I never could get into books like Phantastes or Lilith – perhaps because I’m too dumb to understand them. One fantasy of MacDonald’s which you might enjoy, however, is At the Back of the North Wind in which he explores the concept of death.

Science Fiction

Though the genre really appeals to me, I’ve just about given up on science fiction. So much of it has degenerated into little more than tales of lechery, debauchery and, ironically, magic, set in a distant time and/or alien place. Though there are exceptions, about the only stuff worth reading any more are the stories dealing with hard science. So, let me mention just a few of the classics:

A Canticle for Leibowitz by Walter M. Miller, Jr. The main theme of this book is the limits and ethics of technical progress. Should mankind pursue certain kinds of knowledge? What safeguards can be put in place to prevent the use of science for evil? In some ways, this book is a commentary on Genesis, chapters 6 through 8.

C.S. Lewis is best known for his popular explanations, and defense, of Christianity. But he also wrote a trilogy of SF novels. The first is, Out of the Silent Planet. In it Lewis exposes the philosophical bankruptcy of materialism and emergent evolution. My favorite of the three books is the middle one, Perelandra. Set in Venus, it is a commentary on Genesis, Chapter 3. It took me a long time to develop an appreciation for the third book in the series, That Hideous Strength. When I first read it, I was too young and inexperienced to understand it. When I began to understand it, I was uncomfortable with one of the themes, which is sexuality within the marriage covenant. Lewis, himself, wrote that this book was not suitable for adolescents. Over time, however, the book has grown on me. The older I get, the more I appreciate it. The broader point of the book is the same as Lewis made in his essay Abolition of Man in which he discusses the attempt of certain philosophies to destroy or deny everything which makes us more than a form of animal.

Though not a classic, I found The Return by Buzz Aldrin and John Barnes rewarding. They discuss the future of the space program. The book reads almost like a thriller.

Americana

We humans have a tendency to hanker after the “good old days.” In doing so we tend to overlook the blessings we currently enjoy and compare the worst of now to an unreal, rosy-tinted past. In reality the old days often weren’t all that good. But they are fun to read about.

An author I enjoyed when growing up is Sterling North. His book, Rascal about a boy and his pet raccoon gave me many hours of pleasure. Another tale set in the backwoods of Indiana in 1903 may be of interest. It’s called, So Dear to My Heart. It’s about the struggles of an orphan to come to grips with faith and the tragedy of his parent’s death. The book is laced with homespun wisdom.

Cheaper By the Dozen by Frank B. Gilbreth, Jr. and Ernestine Gilbreth Carey, is one of those books that you find yourself reading over and over. It’s about a unique and irrepressible family with a dozen kids.

Everything But Money by Sam Levenson. This is a hilarious account of a Jewish family growing up in the slums.

Ralph Moody has written a series of semi-autobiographical books about growing up in the early 1900’s. Extremely well written, they not only describe a bygone era in an unforgettable way, but contain a wealth of practical wisdom about life in general. Highly recommended, especially the first book and the last two. The books are:

Little Britches; Father and I Were Ranchers

Man of the Family

The Home Ranch

Mary Emma and Company

The Fields of Home

Shaking the Nickel Bush

The Dry Divide

Horse of a Different Color: Reminiscenses of a Kansas Drover

War

It seems like most of human history has been defined by war. There have been relatively few periods when there hasn’t been a war going on somewhere in the world. Wars have often been major turning points in history. Therefore, it’s necessary to understand something about the wars which have been fought in order to understand our world and how we got where we are today.

John Keegan explores the nature of warfare and why men fight in his book, The Face of Battle. In it he compares 3 battles from different eras which were fought in roughly the same geographic area.

The American Civil War was the first war fought on an industrial basis. It had a profound effect, not only on the history of the United States, but on world history. The best history I know of it is Shelby Foote’s, massive, 3-volume, The Civil War, A Narrative. Foote has the ability to describe a complex battle in a way that is both understandable and easy to read. Another strength of this work is the essays he includes which give the strategic and political contexts which the protagonists faced. Well worth reading.

World War I was probably one of the most senseless conflicts ever fought. The Guns of August by Barbara Tuchman is an extremely well researched and well written account of the first month of the war. One of the things which makes this book so valuable is the detailed account of the conflict’s background and context.

Of all the wars, World War II is a source of unending fascination for me. Here are just a few books which you may find of interest:

The Longest Day by Corneilius Ryan. This is an account of the Normandy landings of June 6, 1944.

Is Paris Burning? by Larry Collins and Dominique LaPierre. This recounts the defense and liberation of Paris.

Ultra Goes to War by Ronald Lewin. The amazing story of how the German communications were deciphered and used by the allies. The intelligence gained in this way had a huge influence on the conduct of the war.

A Bridge Too Far by Corneilius Ryan. This book is about operation Market-Garden, Montgomery’s ill-fated attempt to end the war early by an attack through Holland.

The Tenth Fleet by Ladislas Farago tells of the American anti-submarine efforts in the Atlantic theater.

I really hesitate to recommend anything by Herman Wouk. In my opinion, there is not enough redeeming value in most of his stuff to make up for the morally objectionable. Something which particularly disturbs me in his romance The Winds of War and its sequel, War and Remembrance is that many of the main characters consider themselves Christians, yet their Christianity does not translate into righteous living. That may be true to life, but I find it corrosive to my own spirit. So why mention the books here? First, though these are romances, the history is accurate. But the real value is that in both books, the author inserts essays written by a fictitious German general which explain and describe the war from the German point of view. Very interesting and insightful. So, should you run into these novels, read von Roon’s essays and skip the rest.

One of the most interesting books I’ve ever read about the war is Samurai by Saburo Sakai with Martin Caidin and Fred Saito. Sakai was the leading Japanese air ace to survive the war. Reading about the war through Japanese eyes is fascinating.

Popular History

I often learn more from historical novels than I do from history books. I suppose the reason is that the novel is able to express and explore emotions and attitudes that are outside the realm of ‘serious history.’ Though extremely well-written, I hesitate to recommend the novels of James A. Michener, because they often contain sections which are quite explicit. It could be argued, of course, that what he writes is true to life. Each person will have to make his own judgment whether the insights gained redeem the presence of objectionable passages. Two of Michener’s books which were a blessing to me are Chesapeake and Poland.

The books of Larry Collins and Dominique LaPierre should probably be classed as narrative history. They aren’t novels, yet sometimes have the quality of a novel. One of their books which helped me understand the birth of the nation of Israel is O Jerusalem. If you’re interested in the end of the British Raj in India, Freedom At Midnight is a good book to read.

Mystery

It’s possible for mysteries and thrillers to have a serious point. Just as historical novels sometimes teach me more than history books, a good mystery can sometimes teach things which I wouldn’t have learned otherwise. It was a series by T. Davis Bunn which alerted me to the conditions in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet Union. A very interesting read, written from a Christian perspective. The books are:

Florian’s Gate

The Amber Room

Winter Palace

Another good series written from a Christian perspective is by Mindy Starns Clark. Each of the books deals with a particular social problem – all within the larger context of a story plot which is carried on from one book to the next. They are:

A Penny For Your Thoughts

Don’t Take Any Wooden Nickels

A Dime a Dozen

A Quarter For a Kiss

The Buck Stops Here

Family Books

The children’s books by Arthur Ransome have absolutely nothing to do with Christianity or spiritual things. They are just plain, good, clean, wholesome fun. They’re about a bunch of children who like boats, use their imagination, and manage to get themselves into some rather interesting predicaments. I spent many hours reading these books to my wife and children. We enjoyed them immensely as a family. The books, in order (the children grow older from one book to the next), are:

Swallows and Amazons

Swallowdale

Peter Duck

Winter Holiday

Coot Club

Pigeon Post

We Didn’t Mean To Go To Sea

Secret Water

The Big Six

Missee Lee

The Picts And The Martyrs

Great Northern?

The only two books which some might find objectionable are Peter Duck and Missee Lee as they are a bit blood-thirsty. The extenuating circumstance is that both of them are tall-tales which the children imagine. In Peter Duck they embark on a hunt for buried treasure, while in Missee Lee they run afoul of Chinese pirates. In neither case do the children, themselves, do anything violent or even very bad.

Another series which you might enjoy either by yourself, or as a family was written by Jan Karon. The series is about an Episcopalian priest and his ministry. No, I don’t agree with some of his theology – particularly his concept of the process of salvation – but there’s a lot of quiet humor in the books and there are some surprisingly good insights into the character of people and the situations which all church leaders run into. The books are:

At Home in Mitford

A Light in the Window

These High Green Hills

Out to Canaan

A New Song

A Common Life

In This Mountain

Shepherds Abiding

Thrillers

Yes, I read thrillers, too. You’d be amazed at the things you can sometimes learn from them. Two, which I really enjoyed, written from a Christian perspective, are by an author I’ve already mentioned – Jeanette Windle. The first is Crossfire which gave me some valuable insights about the drug trade and the Christian response to it. The sequel is Firestorm which talks about the vulnerability of the U.S. to terrorism.

Another book, from a Christian point of view, which I really enjoyed is Double Vision by Randall Ingermanson. The science was so intriguing that I was inspired to check out what the author wrote about. (Ingermanson should know what he writes about – he is a physicist, after all. I don’t buy his multi-universe theory, but the hard science checks.) What I really enjoyed, however, was the character of the lead programmer, and his struggles to reconcile his feelings with his beliefs. Priceless. So is the recounting of the parable of The Prodigal Pappa.

Another series which some may find interesting is by Randall Arthur. Though the story lines are rather far fetched, he does tackle some real spiritual issues. The first book, Wisdom Hunter, deals with the issue of legalism. What is particularly valuable are the diary entries made by the main character as he finds his way back to faith after renouncing legalism. Jordan’s Crossing, is not nearly as rewarding. It deals with liberalism. The third book, Brotherhood of Betrayal, is about the church’s response to those who are hurting and those who have fallen.

Gothic Romance

Of course no list could possibly be complete without a few of these! Not only did George MacDonald write a lot of fantasy, he also wrote many novels. The novels are interesting, not so much for the plots which tend to be quite similar (lost heir, unexpected inheritance, love interest) but for the spiritual observations and comments which the author keeps interjecting. The Curate’s Awakening convicted me about always giving sources for the material I use. Perhaps my favorite of MacDonald’s books is The Baron’s Apprenticeship. In it, the main character keeps doing what is right even though it costs him dearly, only to have those decisions pay off big-time in the end. Two other books by MacDonald you may enjoy are The Fisherman’s Lady and its sequel, The Marquis’ Secret.

Enough Already!

Well folks, that should keep you occupied for a while! There’s a lot more which could be added to the list but it’s gotten long enough. Maybe, if the fit takes me, I’ll publish a supplement at a later date. In the meantime, happy reading!

Sooner or later, all of us in church leadership are confronted with a pretty basic decision. This decision will affect just about everything we do. It will determined the character of our assemblies and the kind of outreach we do. It will have an impact on how we grow and the nature of that growth.

What’s really scary is that some congregations seem to make this decision by default without really discussing it or even thinking about it. I’ve known some that just sort of went along with the flow and didn’t seem to have any sort of strategic vision at all.

Now, I think it’s a fairly safe bet that all of us want our congregations to experience dynamic and vibrant growth. At least there are few, regardless of what they think in their heart of hearts, who would say that they didn’t want it. The real question is how we will go about fostering it.

This goes way deeper than any method or technique. I’m talking about the beliefs and philosophy behind the techniques, methods and programs. Whatever you happen to think about the “driven” movement (and I have a pretty dim view of it) one positive thing about it is that it brought some of the issues into the open and got some congregations thinking about them.

Again, I’m not talking about methods and techniques. For example, this whole business of being “seeker sensitive” is merely a symptom of something much deeper. It is a reflection of an underlying philosophy. It’s that philosophical choice I want to talk about.

Let me give you a little background. None of us involved in starting the congregation where I used to serve had ever participated in a church plant before. Since we were concerned about a lot of the trends and problems we saw in the congregations from which we came, we intentionally tried to do things differently. One of the differences was that we deliberately disregarded almost all of the things the church planting gurus say are necessary to get a congregation going. Truth be told, some of us weren’t even aware of the conventional wisdom about church plants. We weren’t trying to build that kind of congregation, so my attitude was, (and still is) that many of the dictums of the ‘experts’ simply didn’t apply. And, against all pronouncements and predictions of the experts, it worked. Yes, we made our share of mistakes and, if I had to do it over, I’d do a few things differently. But, as it happened, things worked out much better than I envisioned. I figured that after 6 months we might have 35 people in attendance. Much to our delight, average attendance was about 60, right from the start.

But the honeymoon ended. Attendance plateaued and even went down a little. Things started to seem a little stale. We started getting criticism. There’s no doubt that we needed to improve some things. We made some changes which helped things run smoother, but there was still some dissatisfaction below the surface. Things came to a head when a person who claimed to be representative of the feelings of a fair-sized number of others presented us with a laundry list of things which needed to change before they could really commit to the congregation.

This situation illustrates, I think, the central dilemma, the crucial decision, which the leadership of every congregation must face. It is impossible to be all things, to all people, all the time. There will always be different interest groups trying to pull the congregation different directions. No matter what you choose; no matter what direction you take, there will be some dissent and disagreement. Not even Christ could always get everyone on the same page. How do you choose what to do?

It seems to me that unless a congregation merely allows itself to be blown in whatever direction the wind is blowing at the moment, it can choose to follow one of two basic principles:

1) It can figure out what demographic it wants to reach and shape itself to appeal to that group of people.
2) It can figure out what its core values are and expect those who join the congregation to subscribe to those values.

There is a fundamental and irreconcilable difference between the two approaches. You’ve got to choose between the two. If there’s a third option, I don’t know what it would be.

Those in the first camp justify it with Paul’s statement about becoming “all things to all men” in order to save some by “all possible means.” (1 Corinthians 9:22) It’s my personal opinion that many who quote Paul to justify the direction they are taking their congregations are taking his statement out of context. Be that as it may, those who adopt the first path allow external forces to shape, and ultimately control, the church.

This is one of the crucial problems inherent in the “driven” philosophy. The approach is based on what the corporate world describes as “customer satisfaction.” Tailor the message so it will appeal to “seekers.” Give the people what they want. They’ll come if they feel comfortable. Concentrate on the needs people feel.

Another component in following this path is adopting what one writer calls the “utility principle.” In other words, do what works. To paraphrase a statement I’ve heard, “Don’t try to figure out what the Lord will bless. Instead, put your efforts behind what the Lord is already blessing!” Aside from the obvious problem that if everyone followed the advice, nothing new would ever be started, how do you ensure that it really is the Lord who is blessing? How do you measure success? All too often outcomes are judged by worldly standards – people like it, the offerings are up – rather than by the objective standard of God’s Word, whether it happens to be popular or not.

Is following the first path the choice the Lord would have the church make? I think not. It seems to me that this whole philosophy runs counter to much of what Christ taught. If Jesus was concerned about customer satisfaction He surely would not have preached His sermon on the Bread of Life. He lost most of His followers over that one.

He also didn’t cater to “felt needs.” For example, the woman at the well wanted a better water supply. Jesus gave her something very different. As another example, Jesus deliberately delayed answering the summons form Mary and Martha when they called Him to heal Lazarus. In both these cases Jesus ignored the “felt need” in order to deal with the much deeper and fundamental spiritual issue.

Jesus set His brothers straight about the “utility principle” when they urged him to “show yourself to the world.” Jesus told them, “The right time for me has not yet come; for you any time is right. The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify that what it does is evil.” (See John 7:3-7) Ouch!

So, what about the second option: deciding what your core values are and expecting people to conform to them? By now, you’ve surely gathered that I think that this is the path which congregations should follow. But it, too, is not without its pitfalls. Perhaps the biggest one is defining what those core values really are. If you’ve ever had to write a statement of faith, you know how difficult it can sometimes be to decide a) exactly what you believe, and b) what is absolute and in what you can allow differences of opinion and compromise.

A related problem is not being willing to change in areas which are non-essential. But if Christ allows freedom in certain details, why shouldn’t we?

It’s also easy to define yourself, or your congregation, by what you aren’t and don’t believe, rather than what you are and the things you do believe.

Okay. Show-time. So, what values do I consider core? Here’s a partial listing. Some of it may surprise you. (Some omissions may surprise you, too. For example, I haven’t listed some basic and fundamental doctrines. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t in the core. I just wanted to mention some of the more unusual items.)

1) The cross of Christ must be central in all we do. By its very nature, the message of the cross is either a stumbling block or foolishness to those in the world. But we must not do anything to take away the cross’ offense lest we also minimize its power. We must be certain to speak and teach about sin and the cross’ role in redemption, even though it is not popular to do so. We must continue to talk about the need to crucify self even though it runs counter to the values of our culture.

2) The assemblies of the church are for Christians, not the “unchurched” unbeliever. The assemblies are primarily for the building up, training and encouraging of the saints, not evangelism. They are not “seeker sensitive.”

3) A plurality of leaders. Most congregations I am acquainted with are led by a so-called ‘Pastor’ whose role is an un-biblical hybrid (a friend of mine calls it a “bastardized role”) between that of an Evangelist and Elder. It is essential for congregations to adopt the New Testament model of leadership where congregations are led by several equal Elders who actively speak, teach, shepherd and oversee the congregation.

4) Mutual edification. We must get past the idea of the professional clergy. Past the idea that only those trained to do so may speak. We must foster an environment where people are transformed from spectators into participants.

5) Emphasis on spiritual growth. Quality is more important than quantity. Christ-likeness is the goal. In time, quality (Christ showing through the lives of His followers) will attract quantity.

In many ways, choosing and following the second path is harder. It runs counter to most of the thinking in church growth circles. For sure it won’t build a mega-church. But I’m convinced it will build mega-Christians!

There’s been a lot of ink spilled in recent years on the subject of what makes congregations grow. Behind a lot of the discussion is an assumption that bigger is better. The assumption isn’t necessarily true. Bigger is not always better. It depends on what is growing and how it is growing. If a cancerous tumor grows bigger, it is hardly cause for joy.

Increasing the body count, or reconciliation?

When we talk about growing congregations, the focus is almost always on attendance. How can we get more people in the door and on the pew? Now I fully agree that evangelism should be a major concern. We need to tell the lost about Christ and do all we can to help them become reconciled to God. But it seems to me that, these days, true evangelism often takes a back seat to increasing the body count. Have you noticed how the terminology has changed? We used to talk about the “saved” and the “lost.” Now it’s the “churched” and the “un-churched.” We used to speak about sin. Now we hear about mistakes or poor lifestyle choices. Conversion has become an ugly word in a culture which emphasizes inclusion and tolerance. We hear more about the need of being sensitive to “seekers” than the seekers do about the need to repent. Dare I suggest that the strategy of growing a congregation bigger by adding unconverted people is not only unhealthy, but disastrous? May I also suggest that achieving numerical growth at the expense of spiritual growth is counterproductive? If a choice must be made between numerical and spiritual growth, I’ll pick spiritual growth every time.

Common assumptions

Now that that’s off my chest, what are some of the factors which affect whether a congregation grows numerically or not? There are all kinds of answers to this question. Each church consultant will trot out his own pet stable of reasons. It seems to me, though, that much of what the consultants say applies more to the corporate world than to the Lord’s church.

For example, it’s common to hear that a congregation can’t grow because of inadequate facilities. It’s like saying that you need to open another assembly line to turn out more widgets. In the church context it’s the “Build it and they will come” mentality. This has just enough truth in it to cause many a congregation to start a capital-giving campaign. It is true that a given facility has a limited seating capacity. It’s also true that some rooms are easier to worship in than others. But seating capacity and beautiful surroundings do not tell the whole story. There are plenty of small congregations rattling around in facilities which are much larger than they can use.

Another limiting factor which is often mentioned is inadequate staffing. In the corporate world it’s equivalent to saying that the company can’t grow any larger until more secretaries are hired to shuffle the extra paperwork. But the assumption behind this thinking is that the church should follow the corporate model. I happen to be of the opinion that if a congregation follows the New Testament model instead of the corporate model, talk of staffing levels no longer applies – there is no staff in the corporate sense.

Another thing which prevents a congregation from growing, they say, is short ministerial tenure. What the consultants mean by this is that a congregation won’t grow very fast or large if it changes its Pastor too often. The analogy is that a company which changes its CEO every few years is probably in trouble. But should the church be organized along hierarchical lines with a so-called Pastor acting as CEO? I think not. That’s not how the early church was organized and the apostolic period was arguably the period of fastest church growth in history.

In my younger days, I thought that the biggest factor which prevented growth was the incompetence of church leaders. In a sense I was right, but in a different way than I thought. Here’s the problem as I now see it: Leaders are not matched to the type of organization they are trying to lead. On the one hand, a leader in the biblical pattern is ill-suited to lead in a congregation which is patterned after a secular corporation. On the other hand, if he is a secular-type executive, he won’t fit well in a congregation organized on New Testament lines. In practice what happens, all too often, is the worst possible combination: Leaders are neither following the biblical pattern of leadership nor are trained as secular executives, yet are placed in congregations which are neither organized fully according to the New Testament example nor do a good job of emulating the secular corporation.

There’s another notion floating around as well. While going through a bunch of old seminar notes, I was struck how speaker after speaker said that in order to retain the people you get to come to church you have to get them involved right away. Upon reflection something bothered me about what I read. Perhaps it was not the intention of the seminar speakers, but it came across like involvement meant participation in various programs and activities. I have to wonder what value an activity has if it does not engage the soul or spirit. Activity is not equivalent to ministry. In fact, busyness may eventually breed disillusionment and be a hindrance to spiritual growth.

Who makes it grow?

In a very fundamental way, though, all this talk of growth is based on a false premise. It assumes that growth is dependent upon human effort. But the Bible is clear that it is God who gives the increase (See 1 Corinthians 3:6). It is perfectly possible to go through all the motions and programs that the church growth gurus say are necessary for growth without growth taking place. “Unless the Lord builds the house, its builders labor in vain…” (Psalm 127:1 NIV)

An alternative model

Assuming, then, that our priorities are right and we trust in the Lord, rather than our own wisdom and efforts to bring about growth, what factors will encourage healthy and biblical growth? I suggest the following:

1) A biblical Eldership. What I mean is that the Elders are truly servant-shepherds-overseers instead of the board of directors-business managers that they have so often become. As much as possible, the Elders leave the details of church business and benevolence to the Deacons so they can concentrate on spiritually nurturing the flock. Instead of relying on a “Senior Pastor” to provide vision and direction, the Elders are fellow servants who share the oversight of the body equally. Instead of relying on ministerial staff they, themselves, are actively involved in the teaching and speaking.

2) Biblical outreach. Most of the congregations I know suffer from a sort of schizophrenia. On the one hand there is a recognition that the purpose of the assembly is to feed the flock. On the other hand, the assemblies are used to preach to the unsaved. Preachers are hired to speak to the congregation and the congregation is urged to invite the unsaved to the assembly to hear the preacher.

In contrast to this, according to the biblical model, the church assembly is for nurturing and building up of the body. Taking the gospel to the lost is done outside of the church assembly. Preachers (or Evangelists, to use their biblical title) as a general rule, do not address the congregation during the assembly, but spend their time evangelizing the unsaved. They go out to the lost instead of expecting the lost to come to them. Instead of inviting the unsaved to church in hopes they will hear the gospel from a professional, the members of the congregation invite the lost into their homes, small groups or Bible studies in order to share the gospel with them in person.

3) Putting the doctrine of “The Priesthood of all Believers” into practice. Though we say we believe the doctrine, we are conditioned by training, culture and natural inclination to rely on the services of a professional clergy. My use of the term “professional clergy” will raise howls of protest from many but, in truth, that is what our preacher system has all too often become.

In contrast, we need to foster an environment where each member of the congregation actively ministers to each other. I do not mean getting people involved in programs. Programs and activities can often become smoke-screens which hide real spiritual needs. Active ministry involves at least two things: a) Mutual edification. People must have the opportunity and be encouraged to share their spiritual insights with one another. This can happen in a variety of ways, but the goal is to transform spectators into participants. b) Mutual caring. The support base for the people in the congregation needs to be within the congregation itself. They need to learn not only to rejoice with each other, but to also bear one another’s burdens. In short, our congregations need to act as family rather than acquaintances.

4) Multiply by dividing. Our natural tendency is to want bigger and bigger congregations. But the most healthy growth might result from learning to let go. I mentioned in another blog entry that we have a limited ability to process social relationships. A group loses its cohesion when it grows larger than about 150 people. Simple, natural and informal relationships and communication must be replaced by formal structures and systems before a larger group can function effectively. In order to retain simplicity and the feeling of family, a congregation must consciously plan to spawn off other congregations before it nears the 150 limit. A corollary to this principle is that congregations must also consciously prepare and train leadership for the new congregations they spawn.

Physician, heal thyself!

No doubt, many who read this will want to know to what extent I’ve been able to put these principles into practice. It’s a legitimate question. I confess that I was unable to fully implement these ideals at the congregation where I served as an Elder. Unfortunately, my fellow Elders succumbed to the siren song of cultural expectations, church tradition and the corporate model. However, after seeing the results from what we did implement, I have no doubt that following the biblical model of church growth will result in much healthier and long-lasting churches.