|
Monday September 29, 2008 ~ 11 Comments
It's megachurch week here at the blog. To coincide with the release of the top 100 church lists in Outreach Magazine, we will be sharing megachurch info here at the blog.
A new study by Rodney Stark of Baylor University, now available in book form here, is dispelling the popular caricature of the megachurch as spiritual entertainment for the quasi-Christian baby-boomer. What Americans Really Believe reveals that megachurch members tend to be younger, practice evangelism more frequently, and are bigger on volunteerism than those in smaller churches. Oops. There go the stereotypes. And they aren't abandoning the harder, counter-cultural doctrines of the Christian faith either. Those who attend megachurches are more likely to affirm historic Christian doctrines like hell, the exclusivity of salvation through Jesus Christ and his literal return than those in smaller churches. The Washington Post summarized this part of the study saying, "Ninety-two percent of megachurch members believe that hell "absolutely exists," compared with just over three-quarters of small-church members, the survey found. And eight in 10 megachurch worshipers believe that the Rapture -- when followers of Jesus Christ believe they will be taken to heaven -- will "absolutely" take place, compared with less than half of those who attend small churches." For more coverage check out The Washington Times and The Washington Post. Another study by Scott Thumma of Hartford Institute for Religion Research and Warren Bird of Leadership Network trace the megachurch movement over the past eight years and have found both positive consistency and adaptability. Here's a summary of some of their findings: Megachurches - Protestant congregations that draw 2,000 or more adults and children in a typical weekend (attendance not membership) - show considerable consistency over the past eight years. They continue to: You should download their study (PDF) here to read it in full for free. While there certainly are examples of megachurches who do little more than put on a show for the curious and uncommitted, this does not appear to be the case in most evangelical megachurchs. For those who are one prone to criticize the megachurch phenomenon, I bet even you can think of one megachurch you respect. The Baylor and Hartford/Leadership Network publications seem to point out that there are many others who are doing it right as well. I am an advocate for all churches who exalt the gospel and reach their communities for the glory of Christ. That means bigger churches and smaller churches. As I have said before, I think Christians can learn from one another. Throughout this week I will be posting a series of interviews with some of the pastors of the fastest growing and largest churches in America, not because bigger is better, but because these churches have found ways of bringing the gospel to bear on the lives of a great number of people in their cities. So, it's megachurch week-- come by every day and you will read interviews with megachurch pastors, read analyses, and see more research and information about megachurches. Posted on September 29, 2008 at 9:21 AM ~ 11 Comments Tagged with: baylor, megachurch, research 11 CommentsLeave a comment |
  
  |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I will be looking forward to this discussion.
http://mattcapps.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/the-megachurch-and-emerging-generations/
Ed,
It seems like the only time I comment on your blog is when you talk about megachurches. Sorry.
Of course, I would argue that megachurches are intrinsically unhealthy because of the exorbitant building costs, reliance on attractional church programs, and the fact that your pastor doesn't know your name.
If pragmatism is our highest value, then megachurches should be praised. But why do we (that's a collective (we,") talk as though "what works" is the standard we're supposed to use?
By the way, you don't mention, but any idea what percentage of megachurchgoers grew up in small churches?
Caleb, no I don't think it answers the church where they were reared.
And, you are always welcome to come and comment, but I would encourage you to celebrate wherever a Biblical faithful church is found-- whether it meets in a coffee shop or a cathedral.
To me, big is not inherently bad (nor automatically good). And, recent research seems to be challenging old stereotypes.
Ed
I guess I'm not into questioning the idea of megachurches till one get's larger than the church in first century Jerusalem. I don't think James knew the thousands of parisheners in that church by name.
I find it interesting that some of the "mega church" members are more involved on average than "Small churches". I do find interest in what the "mega churches" are doing, however. I realize that our ministry isn't primarily to be about numbers, but every "number" we see represents a soul that we have an opportunity to share our Lord with. If we only see them as "numbers" we have it all turned around. I look forward to the rest of your writing this week. Be blessed!
Craig
Ed,
This should be interesting. I have read a lot of negativity surrounding megachurch movements, which i agree with the books that i have been reading. But the phenomenon of megachurch movements are not common from where i come from. I from Malaysia, a part called Borneo. I like what you said, "I am an advocate for all churches who exalt the gospel and reach their communities for the glory of Christ. That means bigger churches and smaller churches. As I have said before, I think Christians can learn from one another." , and i do think we should learn from each other. Awaiting your next post on the subject.
is megachurch synonymous with seeker sensitive?
Didn't the church begin as a mega-church? ie Jerusalem and 3000 were saved in one day. Sounds like the selfish self-centered idea of "the senior pastor doesn't know me" and my feelings are hurt is kinda off base.
Really enjoyed reading these research pieces. Thank you Ed for blogging them and other like them so regularly. And thanks for allowing comments... which hopefully will continue spurring excellent research.
Unless I've overlooked the obvious -- which is sometimes my spiritual gift -- the research presented still seems to fail to isolate the size variable. People are going to skim the research and conclude that big churches are more effective than smaller churches. But since the mega churches are almost exclusively 'Bible-believing', while the smaller churches no doubt contain quite a mixture of Bible-believing AND dying liberal churches... we thus still don't know how effective small, Bible-believing churches are... vs. their larger counterparts.
And btw, who's measuring 'Great Commission coverage'? That is, on some kind of per-capita basis, what percentage of neighboring homes have been optimally presented with the gospel (by deed and Word)?
Count the number of nearby homes, corresponding to the official attendance... and then go survey 'em. Let me postulate that smaller, Bible-believing churches may well do at least equally well at reaching their neighbors.
David, Billy,
As not to hijack Ed's comment stream, I tried to explain my comment here with a post on Missions Misunderstood.
I'd love for you to stop by, and to hear what you think.
Thanks.
And thanks, Ed.
Indy Christian...I understand your justification for smaller churches in smaller communities or areas that have less population density. But isn't the Great Commission about the numbers?
"All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.� (NIB)
If our goal is to be Christ like and we are called to go to all nations and more than baptizing them, we are instructed to teach (disciple) them, then your main focus as a Church should be to grow and add to your "teachable" numbers every time possible.
So to me that says I am calling you to grow numerically.
I am not saying every Church should strive to be Saddleback in size and scope but if you are truly effective in your community to unreached people, then that effectiveness is shown through your numerical and spiritual growth of your teachable population.