My friend Dennis Adams posted this on his site and I thought you guys might find them interesting. Dennis said,
“Recently I received a message on Facebook about a prophesy given in 1996 (go to sight for prophecy www.missionalcog.com). I was astonished to say the least about what I read and heard. So these stats that I found in recently related articles caught my attention. Thought I would share them with you.”
Really important words are being read on these sites. I wonder what the Christian Church in America plans to do about this? What ever it is I want to be involved in turning these statistics to the growth of the Protestant Church.
Filed under: trends
Actually, there have been studies about the “religious markets theory” and the “circulation of the saints” from one church to another since the 1970s. Two Canadians – Bibby and Brinkerhof were exploring the growth of the Vineyard movement at the expense of other denominations.
Their conclusion was that the growing movements did a better job of attracting and maintaining their new contacts. This had to do with their emphasis on evangelism, the style of worship/preaching and with follow-up (discipleship).
The Pew study shows, however, that many of churches have demonstrated an inability to specialize in any (or all) of these three things.
Tom, that’s interesting. Your term “circulation of the saints” is funny, but it also raised a question in my mind and you may have run across the answer in your research. Is it possible that the “circulation of the saints” has caused an inflation of membership numbers among certain Protestant movements? In other words, significant numbers of individuals getting counted more than once in different movements? If so, how long does it take an organization’s numbers to catch up with reality? That brings one more question. What’s the margin of error for membership numbers?
By the way, I addressed those questions to Tom, but I am sure that some of you have some insight on this. So, please anyone chime in!
Besides, Tom is in St. Petersburg, Russia this week, and I’m not sure if he’ll have the chance to respond or not
Are you suggesting that churches don’t adjust their rolls when people leave but add them when they arrive??
What benefit could there be from having an inflated role? It’s not like there’s a pay scale based on membership, or that pastors or overseers can get a “promotion” based on their numbers.
tongue firmly planted in cheek
Hey, Jon! Thanks for the response and noting my schedule. I’m in a break and can offer a quick answer: “I don’t know.” Bibby and Brinkerhoff were the researchers, but I have those articles back home in Germany.
If I remember right (and that’s a big if), they measured membership roles and church attendance. Some of the growing movements in the 70s and 80s never emphasized formal membership.
But you raise a valid question within our own denomination. Cleaning the membership roles is an unpleasant experience for any pastor/church …. for various reasons (salaries, remaining family members, impression management, etc.) But at least our church in the US tries to measure attendance, too. But for families that rotate between 2-3 churches, even the folks at Pew would have some difficulty measuring things.
But I’d love to see the responses from others, too. Chime in anyone!
Here’s what I know about my area:
1. If every church in Miami-Dade County was filled to capacity twice, only 15% of our population would make it in the doors.
2. Churches in Miami are closing. Our denomination is doing its part in the process.
3. Fewer people attend church in Miami today than yesterday.
4. The largest English speaking church has 3,500 people. Spanish? 8,000. That isn’t so hot considering we have about 4.5 million people. In Homestead, we’re the largest church at 400+ in a town of 80,000…again, not so hot.
I’m going out on a limb, apart from Pew Research and some of the other data recently out and will say that the church in America is shrinking across the board in attendance and in dollars. We’re largely dependent on an affluent, overlychurched, aging demographic.
Once they’re gone, we’ll have to survive on the assets they’ve accumulated and passed on…even though, many of those same people failed to pass on their faith in a way that is received by their children…our very present problem.
A lot of our church organizations in the US are largely dead but on life support. They’ll be able to exist for a long time on edifices built by people who had a hope for their community and a passion for Christ…even though the current organization may not even be by definition a church.
The issue in the COG is not an issue of doctrinal fidelity. Rather, its an issue of practical theology. We are wrestling with maintaining our doctrinal commitments in practice. Any decline can be found in a root issue of failing to focus on what Christ has told us to focus on. We are preoccupied with other stuff, stuff that’s more important than the Great Commission and Great Commandment.
Jesus is standing in the corner, marginalized by our inattention. And, the Holy Spirit is dope to make us feel good and not the person who empowers us to reach people groups.
The response to are ongoing dilemma here in the US is very critical and I hope a foundation to a soon “gathering” of concerned and proactive men and women who will not stand for this shrinkage. It reminds of a wool sweater washed in the washer and then dried in the dryer. It is still a sweater but it just does not fit anymore.
I also view the the problem with our denomination marginalizing Jesus and keeping a shallow happiness with the “mock” movements of the Holy Spirit. Our numbers have a spiritual disease, called shrink-itis!
I have a church here in Santa Cruz with no building and 300 attend. Since I judge my growth on care and compassion you could say that we are doing fine. I base my percentages on how many disenfranchised people are counted in the city. A cultural social system that seems to be growing in America. There are 3600 so the percentages are great. But if I based on the number of people in Santa Cruz it not good ay all. The Lord spoke to my heart and told me to stop what I have been taught and what I think I know and just love people and obey Him. Since that spiritual encounter we really began to grow.
Now please understand the people that attend are people that most churches would not let in the door. Hmm, that sounds like the way to start. There are teachable, willing and desire to hear about change.
I have pastored churches that had really erroneous rolls. I wanted to change that and was told not to by the state powers in charge. Yes, this really messes up the statistics that we read about and proves that the disease
I just received the appointment to pastor a second church with a building. There are 20 people in a building that seats 300. The community has 75,000 people in it. Again, this is not good! I am not sure these people are teachable and really willing to change and let Jesus expand past the corner of the church.
Same spiritual formula though, love people + obey God = growth. Hopefully life can be sent from the church to the community and not contained in a thimble for “sips” to keep the doors open.
The comments on this thread remind me of stats given during the Len Sweet lunch. (I do realize that other stats show the number of growing churches to actually be less). Of America’s 330,000 churches, 75% of them are in decline. Of the 25% that are growing, the majority of those are mega-churches gaining in numbers from the churches that are in decline. It is basically growth from ’sheep-swapping’. Barna suggests that only 2,000 or so churches are actually experiencing growth predominantly from new converts. That is sad. It is not our mission– as true church growth is accomplished when those who do not know Christ find Him. And going along with what Travis said, I really appreciated Len Sweet’s comment that churches spend so much time writing (and rewriting) mission statements, when we already have a mission statement given to us by Christ.
On a side note… my home church in rural town of 300 averages around 175 in attendance. A few years ago the pastor wrote a very nice letter to all inactive members (except to those who were deceased, of course) and asked if they wished for their name to remain on the church membership list. Some wrote back to remove their name; others began attending again and even paying tithes. And, the deceased members finally were removed from the list. Coincidentally, the church actually began to experience new convert growth and take in new members. Today the congregation has more members than it has had in 25 years (and it is about the same as the average attendance). However, the local pastor was paid well above the membership scale, so there was no negative consequence concerning the benefits. But, the congregation is happier that the membership list is more reflective of the actual active members. But, of the 9 COG congregations in my home county, I know that some individuals are listed as members of more than one congregation– and that does not include the membership lists from other denominations.
I am very skeptical regarding membership statistics. Personally I believe pastor benefits should be based on attendance– and maybe still include those who are unable to attend due to ill health or advanced age. For me, here’s the more important question… in current culture, what is the benefit of local church membership (for both the church and the individual)?
Churches target other members. I don’t think they even do it intentionally. Many of their marketing strategies are aimed at other Christians. Many have seen their growth by targeting disenfranchised believers.
If I drove past a Buddhist temple with a sign that said “new contemporary worship” or “real Buddha for real people” or “not your grandmother’s Buddhist temple”, I would have no idea what that means. I’m not familiar with traditional Buddhist worship nor what a superficial Buddhist church looks like. I have no preconceived idea of what Buddhism should be. It is obvious these signs are intended for those who are already familiar with Buddhist worship and are perhaps not satisfied with traditional Buddhism.
Do we think that when we hang similar signs or run similar ads that non-Christians have any idea what we are talking about? The ads are intended for those already on the inside.
Wow, these are some really thought-provoking posts here. Thanks guys!
Louis, your question is very provocative. I will have to chew on it. I think the question itself, when seriously considered, would lead to some very deep self-examination into our structure and its underlying agenda. Intuitively I suspect that in the end we would discover, like American Express, that membership has its privileges, but I’m not sure what those are.
Mike, your analogy on the Buddhist temple and congregation is very, very helpful for concisely getting at the issue of outsider/insider mentality.