Market Driven Philosophy

Continuing on with This Little Church Went to Market by Gary Gilley, he talks about Saddleback Church.

Warren ably demonstrates that many church growth principles are simply common sense on the one hand and purposeful, aggressive leadership on the other. Many of Warren's suggestions are excellent. churches should pay attention to cleanliness and attractiveness, where people are going to park and how new people are going to feel walking through the doors. We should strive for excellence and do our best to communicate God's truth. And we should want to grow - in the right ways. Warren states, 'Every church needs to grow warmer through fellowship, deeper through discipleship, stronger through worship, broader through ministry, and larger through evangelism.'

The leaders of the market-driven church believe that 'the most effective messages for seekers are those that address their felt needs.' However, this approach is not drawn from the Bible; it is draw from market research and the latest in pop-psychology. No one denies that there are many benefits to the Christian life, but these benefits must not be confused with the gospel. The gospel is not about helping [unchurched] Harry feel better about himself and his circumstances; it is about his rebelliousness against a holy God who will ultimately condemn him to hell if he does not repent and trust in Christ for the forgiveness of his sins. The distinction between the market-driven approach and the biblical approach lies largely in understanding this fundamental difference.

In America for example, fifty percent of churches average fewer than 75 attendees on any given Sunday, and only 5 percent attract more than 350, according to Barna's surveys. Church growth gurus use these figures to prove that the church has lost its edge - it is not making a significant impact on society. But is this the case? David Wells shares his thoughts,

A century ago, in 1890...the average Protestant church had only 91.5 members, not all of whom would have been in attendance on any given Sunday; a century before that, in 1776, the average Methodist congregation had 75.7 members. It seems to be the case that our churches today are about the same size as they have always been, on average, and the supposition that we are not experiencing drastic shrinkage needs to be clearly justified before it can be allowed to become the premise for new and radical strategies.

As a matter of fact, church attendance in 1937 averaged 41% of the population, whereas it was 42% in 1988, leading Wells to comment, 'Barna's efforts to make mega churches the benchmark of normality and then to argue that churches of conventional size are failures is simply unwarranted and wrongheaded.

It doesn't take a mathematician to realize that if the percentage of Americans going to church has remained constant, yet mega churches are popping up almost weekly, then the giant churches are largely being populated by folks funnelling in from small churches. Just as the major retailers are killing mom-and-pop department stores, chain restaurants and groceries are doing the same in their respected venues, and the Mall has demolished 'downtown', so the mega-churches are doing a number on the small church. But large does not necessarily mean better, and when all the numbers are tallied, overall church attendance (on a percentage basis) is not increasing despite the methods championed by these mega-churches.

That's enough for today. Lots to disseminate. I have to go move concrete and then paint. Fun! Blessings to the start of a wonderful weekend!