Rethinking the Value of the Smaller Church Part 3

The Value of the Smaller Church

by Certified Church Consultant, David W. Smith

(Part 3 of 3)

What’s the most valuable thing on earth? Wow! That’s a loaded question. Value is dependent on the standard used to measure it. If value is determined by financial cost, then the most valuable thing on earth is the nitrogen atom-based endohedral fullerenes. This is a powdery substance used to make miniature highly accurate atomic clocks for GPS and quantum computing. It currently sells for $140 million per gram making it the most valuable substance on earth.

Church size isn’t the biggest determiner of the impact a church can make. There are challenges and benefits inherent in church ministry. Some expound and some evaporate as churches grow. Let’s examine some of the challenges and benefits of churches based on the paradigm outlined in Part Two.

Volunteers:
Smaller churches tend to have higher levels of volunteer commitment. This is most often out of necessity. They usually don’t have full-time staff, especially those in the small church category. Most of their pastoral leadership is either volunteer or bi-vocational. This limits the amount of time the leaders can invest in the spiritual growth and development of those whom God has called them to shepherd. That challenge notwithstanding, smaller churches tend to have higher per capita giving rates and much higher volunteer percentages.  Because there is usually a single pastor, the focus on an Ephesians 4:11-13 philosophy is high – train, equip, encourage, and release people to do the work of the ministry. The benefit of the smaller church lies in this distinctly biblical method of ministry. Of necessity, ministry oversight and execution must be decentralized. Congregants (i.e. volunteers) must be equipped and released for ministry if people are going to be evangelized and discipled. As churches grow, they hire more staff to oversee programs and outreach. A natural transition occurs that sees lower levels of volunteer leadership and growing staff oversight. The larger the church becomes the harder it must work to recruit and retain committed volunteers. Often, ownership of church ministry is abdicated to paid staff giving ministry a more industrialized feel making it harder to retain the relationally personal touch that comes more naturally in smaller churches.

Relationally Oriented:
Smaller churches are typically much more relationally oriented than programmatically driven. They have more of a family feel. Attendees know each other, build deep relationships, and do daily life and ministry in a much more integrated way than their larger cousins. The largest benefit of a more relationally oriented congregation is seen with marginalized people groups (e.g. people living with disability, poorer members of the community, et. al.). People in marginalized groups often find higher levels of acceptance in smaller churches. They more readily build deep friendships and are often included quicker in service and leadership roles. Smaller churches can’t provide the same level of accommodations for people in marginalized groups that larger churches can. Often, they can’t afford to accommodate and assist people in the same way larger churches can. This limits their ability to welcome every circumstance of life people bring.

Facility Usage:
Smaller churches are generally not able to open their buildings, if they have them, for community use. The larger a church becomes; the more availability they have to offer services to the community. Interestingly, medium sized churches tend to do this thinking it’s an avenue to gain attendees. Research shows medium sized churches are experiencing the largest percentage of decline in America. While they open their buildings to the community assuming it will help them grow, doing so doesn’t typically translate to increases in attendance. Larger churches who open their facilities up for community use tend to see higher visitor and retention rates from the community when they do.

Giving:
The average giving amount in evangelical and protestant churches in America is $17 per week. Only 37% of regular church attenders give money to their churches. 5% of givers give weekly with 81% giving annually or semi-annually. Smaller churches typically have higher per capita giving rates. Though total revenue amounts are lower, the regularity and frequency of giving is higher. That said, smaller churches are often challenged with lower revenues and rising infrastructure costs. They tend to allocate most of their budgets to buildings/real property, insurance, and salaries/benefits; leaving little to invest in outreach and programs. Most often buildings are aging, and costs are rising, making it difficult for smaller churches to remain fiscally viable. As churches grow, this challenge mitigates to a degree.

Conclusion:
So, where’s the value of the smaller church? How can a smaller church maximize its impact? Smaller churches bring an immense relational equity to church ministry that often wains as churches grow. They have higher levels of commitment, volunteer involvement, and per capita investment. All of these are things that decrease with size. If there is anything that larger churches can learn from smaller churches, it’s this – don’t sacrifice relationships on the altar of programs. The New Testament contains more than 60 specific instances where commands to execute ministry relationally. These “one another” passages (e.g. Ro 12:10, 16; Gal 6:2; Col 3:13; et. al.) are the backbone of how church ministry should happen.

Regardless of church size, the body of Christ should never lose its investment to deepen relational bonds between believers and grow community within its ranks. Smaller churches work this way much more naturally than larger churches – often out of necessity and circumstance. That does not mean larger churches cannot and should not creatively work to retain their relational bonds. Decentralization of ministry oversight and intentional volunteer investment is difficult the larger a church becomes, but it is not insurmountable. When larger churches retain the Ephesians 4 ministry model, staff become equippers and leaders of leaders. As congregants are equipped, encouraged, and released to do the work of the ministry, volunteer engagement and commitment levels increase and per capital giving grows. Smaller churches must intentionally work to build relational equity in the absence of other resources. That’s the secret sauce of their impact.  If larger churches can learn to do that while not losing the naturally present relational equity of their smaller cousins, it will enhance the cause of Christ in significant ways. Let’s not underestimate the smaller church. They bring a lot of value to the ministry landscape.