A Plea for Ecclesiastical Efficiency

When it comes to church growth, it is well known that a church that attempts to spread itself too thin (i.e., too many programs, too quickly) will be mediocre at everything. The better model is to find the congregational strength, shore it up as the foundation, and then slowly spread your ministry from that point. Certainly, this model of conserving resources and building on strengths is a model used in many grwoing congregations of various denominations.

What then of our larger church structure? As synods, diocese, and denominations, we spread our resources equally. Congregations that are viable and congregations that are obviously in the decline toward death receive the same resources, time, and attention. Indeed, more of our shared resources are used for congregations that are not viable. The result is that congregations that could grow, with just a little push, do not receive the resources that they need.

What do I mean by viable? Some congregations are growing communities of disciples, these are obviously congregations that are doing well. Other congregations have started to slouch toward closing the doors, these are not now viable, and probably will not become viable without a major transformation. In the middle are congregations that are not currently growing, or are marginally growing, yet who are positioned for growth in faith in numbers - viable congregations.

In a congregation, we at times have to say farewell to ministry; to look at it, agree that it served a purpose in its time, but it is no longer supporting the mission of the congregation. What would happen if we started to do that as the larger church? If we had an honest conversation about the congregations that are - or are capable of - serving the mission, and those that are not? And then, what would happen if we pooled our resources into only those congregations who are - or who are capable of - serving the mission?