|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Comfortable fibs? #1 The "numbers game"
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
This is sparked off by a throwaway in one of Gamaliel's posts over on the Service-lite churches thread but has been brewing in my head for a long time.
I often hear (and in the past have used myself) the phrase "(Obviously) it's not a numbers game" or "It's more than just a numbers game" in the context of church activities, be they services, social action or indeed pretty much anything. I get where it comes from, certainly in evangelical circles, where those of us who are MOR/liberal are sensitive to accusations of just wanting to take over the world or build a megachurch or get a high nominal body count but not care about nurture, growth, development and so on. And to an extent it's a useful corrective/reminder to think about what we're doing across the board, not just about dragging in new folk (or where we're dragging them from).
But it's bollocks, isn't it?
Of course it's a numbers game. It has to be a numbers game. If one actually believes that Jesus is the Son of God; the Way, the Truth and the Life; our redeemer; that believing in Him is the bedrock of salvation then ... it's a numbers game. The unreached need to be reached. Those who haven't heard need to hear. And preferably believe. Which means numerical growth. You know, a numbers game. If the numbers aren't getting bigger, the job isn't getting done.
Now, as mentioned above, I know it's not just a numbers game, but it seems to me that we tend to rely on it "not being a numbers game" in order to give ourselves a bit of a free pass on the whole spreading the [W]|[w]ord thing. To use one of Gamaliel's beloved phrases, it should be both/and ...
I write the above absolutely confident in the knowledge that I am shocking, shocking at talking to folk about Jesus, at sharing whatever strange, misshapen, apologetic faith I have, and I am sounding off with myself firmly in the sights, little red dot dead centre on my noggin. Because, you know, it's not a numbers game, and I show God's love in many subtle ways, so that's OK.
Are there any other well-meaning phrases we trot out that ultimately undermine us more than they highlight risks/false emphasis? Kind of a bullshit bingo, but with a point ...
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Snags:
The unreached need to be reached. Those who haven't heard need to hear. And preferably believe. Which means numerical growth. You know, a numbers game. If the numbers aren't getting bigger, the job isn't getting done.
So it's a selling game?
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Snags:
believing in Him is the bedrock of salvation then
This is where I start to quibble. I would say that the fact and nature of Christ himself is the bedrock of salvation, not whether we believe in him or not.
The source of the "it's not a number game" thing is the perennial problem of managing to draw a big crowd a la Billy Graham but then not being able to retain or develop the faith of that crowd. If you can engage and develop a lively faith that is lived out in good works among a large group of people then that is better than doing the same with a smaller number of people, but that is rarely the choice we are faced with.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Snags:
The unreached need to be reached. Those who haven't heard need to hear. And preferably believe. Which means numerical growth. You know, a numbers game. If the numbers aren't getting bigger, the job isn't getting done.
So it's a selling game?
Possible, in a sense; possibly more fairly described as an "offer awareness game". After all, the implication behind "Go and make disciples" wasn't "by force and any other means necessary."
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Snags:
believing in Him is the bedrock of salvation then
This is where I start to quibble. I would say that the fact and nature of Christ himself is the bedrock of salvation, not whether we believe in him or not.
The source of the "it's not a number game" thing is the perennial problem of managing to draw a big crowd a la Billy Graham but then not being able to retain or develop the faith of that crowd. If you can engage and develop a lively faith that is lived out in good works among a large group of people then that is better than doing the same with a smaller number of people, but that is rarely the choice we are faced with.
Fair enough, and I wasn't laying out my own personal take on it, just picking up on some hopefully fairly standard 'hooks'.
I do understand the origin of the phrase, and the concerns behind it. I just wonder, increasingly given the contexts in which I hear it (and deploy it) whether it is an over-corrective and a call for small dreams and stasis.
Disclaimer: I'm sure this sounds like I'm turning into a raving evo tub-thumper who wants the next big mission. Nothing could be further from the truth, I really don't get that as a way to 'do it'. I'm just pondering on the impact such phrases have on my own attitudes and behaviours in the smaller sphere, and the potential knock-on as that widens out.
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
Snags:
Do you believe that you could realistically prove from the Gospels, that Jesus was concerned about the number he was able to get to follow him?
I doubt it, but I'm prepared to be instructed.
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
People who say "its not a numbers game" usually mean "we are not winning in terms of numbers".
Another comfortable fib is "We believe God is leading us to this". It usually means that "We want to do that, but some people will not like it".
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
No.
However, do you believe Jesus would have been well-pleased if the first disciples had sat on their hands, maybe chatted casually with a couple of mates down the pub, and done nothing else?
I'm clearly failing to put across the underlying niggle, and the old brain is far from firing on all cylinders at the moment.
Ultimately, it's a people game, not a numbers game. I utterly deplore the tendency to treat church like a business, and to 'keep score' particularly by measuring stats and numbers.
BUT.
The Great Commission. The NT accounts of the church (in the form of converted believers) growing dramatically and swiftly. The fact that if Jesus really is Good News then sharing it really ought to be good and exciting, not mildly embarrassing and socially awkward.
So numbers aren't the target, but should be a side effect. Or not? Are we just too sophisticated to give a shit? (Or am I just overtired enough to be indulging in public self-examination and therapy, in which case I may have to step away from the keyboard for a while!).
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anteater:
Snags:
Do you believe that you could realistically prove from the Gospels, that Jesus was concerned about the number he was able to get to follow him?
I doubt it, but I'm prepared to be instructed.
How about John 12:32 if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
Suggests an interest in rather large numbers.
Whether ultimately drawing "all humans" is a given or somehow dependent on what we do, is probably not agreed among Christians.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
If you think about operating a church in the usual day-to-day sense, an institution at a given address in society, then of course it can be viewed as a numbers game. If your congregation is too small, you may end up closing your doors.
If the congregation is too large, the flavor changes and some people may leave. In some sense, that's real life.
If you think about the church as an interaction between human beings and God, then the minimum size is rather small: wherever two or three are gathered together. Such a small group perhaps cannot accomplish a great deal, save for one another, but maybe that is almost enough.
It seems important to think of a church/the church both ways.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Snags:
Those who haven't heard need to hear. And preferably believe. Which means numerical growth. You know, a numbers game. If the numbers aren't getting bigger, the job isn't getting done.
What bothers me about this agendum is that, if a cancer or a virus could speak, it would express the same goal.
Wouldn't you agree that if growth comes at the expense of making a wasteland of home territory, then means have been mistaken for ends?
I'd always assumed that Jesus instructed the apostles to "shake off the dust under your feet" as an expression of disgust at those who would not hear them. But a recent sermon I heard is that it is primarily an expression of self-confidence: sometimes we fail. Take it in stride and move on, without doubting your values.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
So it's a selling game?
It's a fishing game according to the Gospel.
Re. a different point above. I don't think Jesus was too worried about a head count of followers when He had reached the Cross. He'd pissed an awful lot of people off by that time, including many of His own followers with the 'hard saying' about His own flesh becoming the Bread of life.
Coming to today's Church life we have to be realistic, and it's pretty clear that no congregation = no Church
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
Wouldn't you agree that if growth comes at the expense of making a wasteland of home territory, then means have been mistaken for ends?
Absolutely.
But do we allow a recognition of this danger to become a sop for actually being complacent about doing bugger all? I'm not advocating tub-thumping and street corner haranguing here. In fact, I've long held to the general belief that if one just gets out there and does the loving thing, it will be attractive to some and promote growth as a side-effect, not a goal. (It will also be offensive/off-putting/challenging to some who will not darken the door and possibly give you grief to boot. People are strange).
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
I'd always assumed that Jesus instructed the apostles to "shake off the dust under your feet" as an expression of disgust at those who would not hear them. But a recent sermon I heard is that it is primarily an expression of self-confidence: sometimes we fail. Take it in stride and move on, without doubting your values.
I think I've always held it to be closer to the second interpretation, although with an element of "Look guys, we tried, now we're off" - perhaps leaving a thought-provoker behind you, rather than saying "One time offer now expired".
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
It's not a game of anything.
It's way more serious than that. A take it or leave it choice has serious and significant consequences.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Truman White
Shipmate
# 17290
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It's not a game of anything.
It's way more serious than that. A take it or leave it choice has serious and significant consequences.
Took the words right off my keyboard mate.
Posts: 476 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by agingjb:
many are called; few are chosen?
Perhaps few listen and/or accept
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It's not a game of anything.
It's way more serious than that. A take it or leave it choice has serious and significant consequences.
A take it or leave it choice is stupid and unkind in this fuzzy, unclear, non-black and white world of ours.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It's not a game of anything.
It's way more serious than that. A take it or leave it choice has serious and significant consequences.
A take it or leave it choice is stupid and unkind in this fuzzy, unclear, non-black and white world of ours.
We don't all find the world unclear, fuzzy and non black and white: admittedly it's subjective and can be situational but no less clearer for all that (and perhaps less of a cop out).
Most choices are take it or leave it. However stupid and unkind we may feel it is, the reality is that most choices are made primarily on factual outcomes not feelings.
[ 23. December 2014, 17:11: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
It seems to me that many of the folk who say "It's not about numbers" may fall into one of two categories: either the Liberal/MOTR folk who don't particularly agree with the idea that Jesus is the only way of salvation and see religious faith (or not) as little more than a personal choice, without eternal consequences; or the strong Evangelicals who take comfort in the fact that they have a strong faith which, unfortunately, other folk are not 'man enough' to accept for themselves.
But both positions stem, ISTM, from the reality that churches in places like Britain are slowly but steadily declining. The "Liberals" can say, "Well, that doesn't matter, there are other ways to be saved" (that sounds rather complacent); while the Evangelicals can say, "It's better to have a few high-quality Christians than a mass of loosely-believing hangers-on" (that sounds horribly smug). Both groups, ultimately, are making excuses for the Church's failure in these modern times.
You will realise that I am caricaturing both these positions. FWIW my own position is that numbers do matter, although they are not the only thing to matter! I am very much in agreement with the OP.
[ 23. December 2014, 17:23: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Truman White
Shipmate
# 17290
|
Posted
For the purposes of this thread, what sort of numbers are we on about here? Numbers I'm interested aren't just people added to the membership roll of the church. Apart from people who are occasional visitors and enquirers we have the "numbers" of people who are influenced (preferably for good) by a church's mission and ministry. Any change in orientation towards living to do, what Rowan Williams once called "what God put us here for" is a number of interest to me.
Posts: 476 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
I agree with BT. I'm from that Liberal background which argues that the effectiveness of the church is not necessarily demonstrated by the numbers in the pew on a given day but I have come to believe that numbers do matter. Not in a competitive way, but because we have had something important and valuable entrusted to us and we have a responsibility to share it.
[ 23. December 2014, 17:36: Message edited by: Albertus ]
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Most choices are take it or leave it. However stupid and unkind we may feel it is, the reality is that most choices are made primarily on factual outcomes not feelings.
Not at all. We are emotional creatures, otherwise advertising would not work.
We are creative creatures, who learn from our mistakes.
We are forgiving creatures, who practice forgiveness, reconciliation, redemption. We are able to start over if things don't work out.
Life is not a jigsaw puzzle where we only fit into one space and no other is available.
The Church has only survived thus far by being flexible, changing and adapting. But presenting faith as a 'now or never' 'take it or leave it' choice will not help at all imo.
Of course numbers matter, without people there would be no Church - but selling it as a once only offer is blinkered, I think.
<'numbers', not 'umbers' ![[Smile]](smile.gif) >
[ 24. December 2014, 07:43: Message edited by: Boogie ]
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
I agree with BT. I'm from that Liberal background which argues that the effectiveness of the church is not necessarily demonstrated by the numbers in the pew on a given day but I have come to believe that numbers do matter. Not in a competitive way, but because we have had something important and valuable entrusted to us and we have a responsibility to share it.
No, it must never be a case of ministers saying, "We're doing better than you are" in a competitive way. I've seen that happen, and it hurts, especially because churches grow or decline for all sorts of reasons which may have nothing to do with the quality of ministry being offered.
On the other hand, I like your idea of wanting as many people as possible to share the valuable possession which we can offer them - that's nice.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Thanks, BT- it's been really good to see how many people at our place share that way of thinking about it, once one of us had plucked up the courage to voice it (and we're just starting to try to find our way towards doing it, so -if I may get a bit AS-ish for a moment- if you'd care to remember us in your prayers every now and then we'd be grateful!)
[ 24. December 2014, 09:51: Message edited by: Albertus ]
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
It's both. You don't want a church full of people who are there just for the freebies - social time, get your kid into the school, get paid to sing in choir. You want numbers who are connecting with the reality of God and slowly changing to live more of God's values.
I've seen clergy take steps they believed essential to the spiritual health of the church, while fearing the action would spit the church. I.e. numbers are secondary to what a church is about, but secondary doesn't mean "unimportant."
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Snags:
It has to be a numbers game. If one actually believes that Jesus is the Son of God; the Way, the Truth and the Life; our redeemer; that believing in Him is the bedrock of salvation then ... it's a numbers game. The unreached need to be reached. Those who haven't heard need to hear. And preferably believe. Which means numerical growth. You know, a numbers game. If the numbers aren't getting bigger, the job isn't getting done.
If conversion is a one-off thing, like getting baptised, then the number that counts is the number of people you convert or baptise. After that happens, whether they stay as part of your congregation or graduate to the church down the road (or desire to explore further afield) doesn't matter - it's not part of the job. You've done your bit.
If conversely, conversion is an open-ended process, like therapy, then isn't working successfully with the people you have just as valuable to the cause as getting more people in?
In neither case is a bigger congregation a measure of success.
Whereas pride usually wants a more popular brand...
But the most dubious of your assumptions has to be that those who are not in the numbers are unreached by the Good News of Jesus. It's Christmas - do you think anyone in the Western world hasn't noticed ?
Best wishes,
Russ
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
If conversion is a one-off thing, like getting baptised, then the number that counts is the number of people you convert or baptise. After that happens...it's not part of the job. You've done your bit.
If conversely, conversion is an open-ended process, like therapy, then isn't working successfully with the people you have just as valuable to the cause as getting more people in?
If "therapy" is the model, then people coming back for years and years sounds like failure.
Maybe restaurant is a better model. People need to eat frequently to stay healthy. Some find the food they need by going to a restaurant, some grow and cook their food at home, but we all need to eat and formally organized churches are one way of meeting that need. A good restaurant will do some advertising but mostly relies on satisfied patrons telling others so those others will choose to come too.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
DangerousDeacon
Shipmate
# 10582
|
Posted
"Numbers" itself is an interesting concept. Most of the posters here seem to interpret "numbers" as "increase in the number of people in my congregation". But obviously many of us minister in situations where this is not the case. Chaplains (hospitals, defence, seafarers)obviously don't have congregations to grow in that sense.
In my case, having a small Cathedral in a city that is naturally transient (20% turnover of population each five years) with many tourists, I would tend to interpret "numbers" as being about the kingdom of God more broadly. You get used to doing baptisms, weddings, etc for people who are visiting, but then go on to active Christian lives in other cities, far away. But in order to do that, the relatively small stable congregation have to be strongly nurtured, as partners in my ministry. So numbers, yes and no.
--------------------
'All the same, it may be that I am wrong; what I take for gold and diamonds may be only a little copper and glass.'
Posts: 506 | From: Top End | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Very good point.
Mr. Lamb just baptized a man on his deathbed this week, and he has now passed away. I doubt the baptism will be recorded anywhere but in the mind of God, given certain political realities here. And it'll not add to the numbers in our church. But is it growth of the kingdom? yes.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Lamb Chopped: I doubt the baptism will be recorded anywhere but in the mind of God
It has been now.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Not at all. We are emotional creatures, otherwise advertising would not work.
We are creative creatures, who learn from our mistakes.
We are forgiving creatures, who practice forgiveness, reconciliation, redemption. We are able to start over if things don't work out.
Life is not a jigsaw puzzle where we only fit into one space and no other is available.
I'm far too conservative to agree with a lot of what Boogie says, but here she hits the nail on the head.
Is the above what is meant by being made in the image of God? It is certainly an expression of it.
Look at this other numbers game:
quote:
Jesus
For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’
It's not just a numbers game in terms of bums on seats.
There is also the question of how many have you fed or clothed or visited in prison or hospital. Not that evangelism is not important, we should never make it The Great Omission™.
Another of Gamaliel's both/ands?
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
It's not just a numbers game in terms of bums on seats.
There is also the question of how many have you fed or clothed or visited in prison or hospital. Not that evangelism is not important, we should never make it The Great Omission™.
Unfortunately, though, unless you have a certain number of bums on seats you won't have enough people and resources to feed, clothe or visit needy people in the community.
Christians in mainstream churches want to do so much and be so generous, but in the places with the greatest need they often find it a struggle to offer what seems to be required of them. It doesn't help that churches find it easier to envision themselves 'helping' the poor than to be communities where the poor really feel that they belong.
These problems go back a long way. The Edwardian Nonconformists set up so many programmes and invested effort in so much social engagement, but this work couldn't be maintained at a prominent level as the supply of workers and money declined.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
The church I attend most mornings was dying on the vine with about no kids and no money when they played it safe and tried to increase attendance/budget etc.
Then they hired a deacon they clearly did NOT have the money for, but was ... Well, as someone who interviewed him as part of staff-parish before he was hired, I've never seen someone who seemed (even then) more obviously sent by the Spirit. Then at his direction, they started a crazy program they totally didn't have the money for, but was clearly just what the community wanted/needed. Years later the program is relatively well funded, the church budget is (for directly related reasons) better off than it's ever been, and six months ago they started a new service aimed most directly at satisfying what the families with kids wanted. It's doing well.
Sometimes you DO have to do what you think the Spirit wants done and then presume God will provide the how.
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Phantom Flan Flinger
Shipmate
# 8891
|
Posted
It's simple.
Project I like gets big numbers - it's a numbers game.
Project I like gets small numbers - it's not a numbers game.
Project I don't like gets big numbers - it's not a numbers game.
Project I don't like gets small numbers - it's a numbers game.
--------------------
http://www.faith-hope-and-confusion.com/
Posts: 1020 | From: Leicester, England | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I hadn't noticed this thread until now - the name-check passed me by ...
Yes, of course it's both/and ... and what our Phantom Flim Flam friend has just said too ...
The trouble is, I find I'm not very good at either the 'both' or the 'and' ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Most British denominations and congregations that have been around for any length of time have experienced long term decline, so I suppose it seems somewhat unreasonable for their leaders to appear to be obsessed by church growth. The optimism that more prayer, social programmes, friendliess and new forms of church, etc., will make the church grow seems to have waned, IMO, even though growth seems highly unlikely without them.
It's also apparent that the relatively few congregations that have experienced long/medium term growth are benefiting from particular circumstances that are hard to replicate in every other environment. This must make church leaders of growing congregations wary of trying to offer advice to everyone else.
More broadly, in the long term, I think it'll be hard for the churches to represent 'Christian values' to the nation once the number of participants engaged in their work drops below a certain level. Or rather, they can represent what they wish, but their ability to be heard will continue to decrease.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
More broadly, in the long term, I think it'll be hard for the churches to represent 'Christian values' to the nation once the number of participants engaged in their work drops below a certain level. Or rather, they can represent what they wish, but their ability to be heard will continue to decrease.
Oh I don't know - what about our British attraction to minority causes?
It may be that a smaller church will be stronger as there's less dead wood, we'll have less "branches" and lower costs and those people who are left will really mean business. We'll also have a wider range of expressions of church which will be more attractive to a wider constituency.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Religion doesn't seem to be one of those 'minority causes' that the British go in for. But that might change, I suppose.
I understand the oft-made point about losing dead wood. The problem is that human churchgoers are always more than 'dead wood' if they contribute even a little of their time, money and effort to the church, which I presume the 'social churchgoers' of the past would have done. And numbers do help to make churches visible.
It'll become increasingly important to have different types of churches, but I don't know how diverse most parts of the country will be in this respect. Everything that Christians call 'church' seems to require either a lot of money or a lot of time and effort, and usually all three. If the numbers of people are fewer and fewer, where will all this input come from? I think most of the work will be clustered in certain places, leaving the Christian witness elsewhere very weak.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
Even Jesus Christ didn't manage to convert everyone who came by. Realising this takes the pressure off and we can learn to enjoy living out our faith. That's bound to be more attractive than pressured anxiety about increasing numbers, surely?
It's much easier to invite people to join something small, eg. the choir or the craft group, rather than to attend the Sunday services, straight off. So you're not under pressure to sell the faith per se, just asking people to join you in a favourite activity - faith can come later, in its own (God's) time.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
In the CofE perhaps it's the norm for people to join the church choir without feeling connected to any other aspect of church life or belief. This doesn't seem to be the case in other denominations. I once asked here if a person publicly known to be non-believer would be welcomed into a Baptist church choir, and the answer seemed to be largely negative. I'm sure the same would be true for a Pentecostal gospel choir. These singers are expected to believe what they're singing about.
Going back to Exclamation Mark's point, I have read that small churches have a greater likelihood of growing than large churches, which is encouraging - but I've also read that large churches are more likely to be growing churches. Perhaps the problem is that many churches are small because they've declined significantly over time, and growth isn't inevitably around the corner.
Small church plants seem more likely to grow than inherited churches with a long history of decline, but they're also more fragile. They seem to rely heavily on the presence and dynamism of their founders. But even before the issue of growth comes into question, it's hard to imagine where all the dynamic church planters of the future are going to come from. Maybe they'll mostly be 'reverse missionaries' from abroad.
[ 08. January 2015, 22:33: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
