
Almost a year ago, the folks at Outreach Magazine asked me to work with them on their largest and fastest growing issue. I tend to be leery of lists, but they did not just want to publish a list-- they wanted to go deeper. And, I think the current issue reflects their fine work.
The Magazine Issue
The editors of Outreach Magazine, particularly Lynne Marian and Lindy Lowry, have done their usual good work.
Be sure to get the print issue if you do not already have it. The profiles of the churches are excellent.
Some thoughts on the issue
Early on in the magazine planning, I suggested a "confessions of a megachurch pastor" article. The plan was to talk to some of these megachurch pastors and hear their challenges, struggles, and victories. It is worth a read.
Ron Forseth did the interviews that were compiled and edited by Jeannie Choi. Ron is a great brother with a heart for the church. I have had the privilege of spending time with Ron and his family (even bunked over on the spare bed one night). I love reading everything Ron writes. (Ron also runs SermonCentral.com and I will be posting soon on what they have been doing.)
Also, the Outreach folks were very gracious with me as we worked on the lists. First, I wanted to change the formula on how to list "fastest growing church." They agreed-- and I think it worked well. Second, we agreed to only include churches that wanted to participate, not creating estimates or using past data. They also asked me to write a trends piece.
Finally, I wanted to hold up a "missional" vision in one of my pieces, and you will see an article I wrote on the subject-- and several interviews here on the blog in the next few days.
Although I don't see the actual lists online, you can read a news release about the study here.
First Steps
How did we get the numbers? Our team started with previous Outreach 100 lists and contacted all the churches over the last several years. We also contacted all the major (and most minor) denominations in the U.S. to ask them to share their data... many graciously did.
We partnered with Leadership Network and Hartford Institute for Religion Research to share data from churches already on megachurch lists.
More Background on Leadership Network and Hartford
Since I mentioned Leadership Network and Hartford, let me share some of their recent projects.
If you are interested in the megachurch, you really should read Beyond Megachurch Myths, by Scott Thumma (from the Hartford Institute) and Dave Travis (from Leadership Network).
Then, if you are really brave, see Warren Bird's Ph.D. Dissertation, Megachurches as spectator religion: Using social network theory and free-rider theory to understand the spiritual vitality of America's largest-attendance churches. Warren is also with Leadership Network.
You can read about "free rider theory" here and read the dissertation to see how Warren applies it to the megachurch question.
Methodology
We made phone calls to all the churches on those lists. We asked each church for their average weekend worship attendance (adults and children). Churches that are doing multi-venue or multi-site services were asked to include numbers for all sites that were under the main church’s leadership and administrative structure.
Churches were contacted multiple times to obtain attendance numbers. Our team made phone calls but also sent faxes and emails to make sure that the request got to as many people as possible at a particular church. Once we received the numbers, we followed up again by email and/or fax to confirm those numbers to make sure that we were reporting accurately the statistics a church had given us. Accuracy was important to us, but (of course), they are only as accurate as the church's report.
Some, including churchrelevance.com, have already noticed that not all megachurches are listed. Some churches declined to participate, and we recognized that this was due to a variety of reasons… some just don’t see the need or value of “100 lists.” Others simply don’t want their numbers published for a variety of reasons. Other churches never responded to the multiple attempts our team made to gather the numbers.
In discussions with Outreach Magazine’s staff, we decided not to publish church numbers unless we heard from the churches themselves. This way, we avoided any question of whether or not we were “grandfathering” in churches based on reputation alone. Simply put: no report, no list. We think it makes for a better list.
Feedback
We created the blog for feedback, so let me invite you to share your thoughts.
If you have churches that “should” be on the list, feel free to post them here or email us at research@lifeway.com. We would love to improve the list and will publish updates here at the blog after confirming with the churches involved.
Also, feel free to post questions about the research here in this thread.
Conclusion
Please remember, lists are not for comparison. They are for learning and, hopefully, encouragement.
Our desire is that you might learn from these churches, see how God is at work, rejoice with them, and then find God's unique vision for your church: whether it meets in a coffee shop or a cathedral.
Comments (5)
Would you share the "amalgamated" formula you used this year to determine fastest and largest?
Thank you.
Posted by John Draper | October 3, 2007 9:15 AM
Posted on October 3, 2007 09:15
Ed,
I think that the "free rider theory" is one of the greatest challenges for churches of any size, but moreso in churches that have the "mega" attached. In the words of James D. G. Dunn [Jesus and the Spirit, (Eerdmans, 1975), 264], "There is no such thing as passive membership. . . . Initiation into the body ... is initiation into active membership."
What concerns me is that we have so many who aspire to membership, but who have no concept of missionary fidelity within the church. What encourages me is that it is obviously not a new dilemma, for Paul certainly had this in mind when he penned 1 Cor 12.
On a side note, if we could take the "mega" and apply it descriptively to God's mission rather than to the local church, I think we would be less inclined as pastors to give place to pride [at least that's my confession :)].
Thanks again for the work and help.
Eric
Posted by Eric Thomas | October 3, 2007 11:34 AM
Posted on October 3, 2007 11:34
John,
This year we factored in % growth along with actual number growth for the final lists. In years past, it has been based on number growth alone.
Using numbers alone, a church with 1000 weekend attenders in 2006 that grew to 2000 attendees in 2007 (100% growth) would show up lower on the list than a church of 15,000 attendees growing to 18,000 attendees in 2007 (20% growth). Both types of growth are important, so we factored both into the list.
To be on this list, these churches would need to fit the following criteria:
- grow by at least 500 people in weekly attendance from 2006-2007
- average over 1000 people in weekly attendance in 2007
- grow by a measureable percentage between 2006-2007 (usually that growth was above 10%, though a few were lower because their numerical growth was so high)
Once we had a list that met the critieria above, we ranked them by number growth and then by percent growth and averaged the two for their final ranking.
And finally, they simply had to be somewhere on our radar screen or we had to be on theirs. We looked everywhere we knew to look (see the methodology above), but we also realized that by bringing in churches that weren't megas "yet" we were also opening up the likelihood of missing others who would have qualified but weren't on any list that we could start contacting.
Ultimately, the risk was worth it because we felt like this would open up the discussion and attention on a wider variety of churches doing kingdom work. The goal isn't to bring them their 15 minutes of fame, but to bring encouragement to a larger number of pastors, leaders, and churches who are wholeheartedly seeking to grow their churches and reach their communities.
Posted by Ed Stetzer | October 3, 2007 11:56 AM
Posted on October 3, 2007 11:56
Ed,
I noticed on churchrelevance.com that our church Community of Faith is listed at #3 in % growth and #14 in numerical growth and #35 on your list. I was a little confused at the formula. Not doubting, just asking.
Posted by mark | October 8, 2007 5:23 PM
Posted on October 8, 2007 17:23
Mark,
No need to doubt. You are right. We made a mistake. See my blog post today.
Posted by Ed Stetzer | October 9, 2007 8:49 PM
Posted on October 9, 2007 20:49