Do Large Congregations Fulfill God’s Command to ‘Shepherd’?
Jan 17th, 2008 by Nathan White
Let me first begin this post by emphasizing that I personally have nothing against large congregations, per se. Reading through this post might certainly give you the impression that I have something against large churches, but I want to be crystal clear in saying that it is not the size of a church which chiefly concerns me. I can actually think of a few large churches in this nation that I would consider attending if the Lord placed me nearby (by large I’m generally referring to around 500 members or more).
The question which heads this post should be very simple: Do large churches fulfill what God has outlined the church to do?
We live in an age where the mega-church is an increasingly new phenomenon. People are flocking to large churches as never before. But isn’t the size of churches that I have in mind with this question. Rather, it is a two-fold concern of:
- How the churches became large in the first place.
- How the large churches are doing in following the biblical model for a local congregation.
Regarding the first question, I must say that almost all of the large churches I have examined have become large through some troubling means (by scriptural standards, not my own opinions); means such as:
- Compromising the gospel to properly fit and appeal to a wider audience (easy to believe, no-offense gospel-lite, tailored to produce the largest acceptance possible, etc).
- Compromising or refusing to practice church discipline (some large churches will practice it with scandalous sins, but refuse to in other sins).
- Comprising biblical discipleship and teaching in favor of entertainment. The entertainment can be of a variety of forms: music, programs, social clubs for youth and singles, etc.
- Building their congregation around their pastor’s personality.
There are certainly many more reasons we could add to this list, but these are some of the main ones that are most evident and foundational.
The second concern I have is how large churches fulfill the shepherding role God has clearly outlined in His word.
In the extremely popular book, The Reformed Pastor, Richard Baxter says to pastors:
“When we are commanded to take heed to all the flock [Acts 20:28], it is plainly implied, that flocks must ordinarily be no greater than we are capable of overseeing, or ‘taking heed’ to….is not government of great concernment to the good of souls, as well as preaching?…if it be, then they that nullify it by undertaking impossibilities, do go about to ruin the churches and themselves…[you] may as well say to them [your congregation], ‘Let them perish’.”
Baxter makes the point again and again that the role of pastor/elder is a very serious one, according to scripture, and those that undertake to shepherd more than they can deal with on a personal basis are actually doing more damage than good to God’s kingdom.
There is nothing that concerns me more about large churches than the fact that there are so many people who don’t even personally know the man who preaches to them week in and week out. Common sense should tell us that this type of teacher-student relationship is inadequate, and how much more so with spiritual matters?
So, what if a church grows up to the point where the pastor cannot undertake all the responsibilities to the flock? Of course, the biblical model for church leadership (Titus 1 and1 Tim 3: which teaches that instead of one head-honcho pastor who runs the show, there should always be a plurality of elders who rule and shepherd with equal authority), deals with this ‘problem’ quite nicely.
Shepherding is a serious undertaking with serious consequences. I shutter to think of the pastors who are content with ‘ruling’ over and teaching a flock where they cannot personally get to know, mentor, teach, counsel, pray with, and influence every single person in their congregation. As James said, ‘let not many of you be teachers, for they have the stricter judgment’.
If Jesus had 12 disciples whom He shepherded, and even one of them was an unbeliever, how much more so are large congregations now days filled to the brim with unbelievers? Who is going to recognize the fact that they are deceived and thus attempt to ‘pull them out of the fire’?
If pastors are not intimately acquainted with their flock, no matter what he is doing in other areas, more souls will be hurt and lost than nourished and saved. Is this not true?
Nathan,
Excellent post. I completely agree with you.
Les
I think the one of remedies that you suggested (Scriptures suggest also) for big churches important: a plurality of elders. I mean, let’s face it–there is no way that one ’senior pastor’ can shepherd 500 people.
“I think the one of remedies that you suggested (Scriptures suggest also) for big churches important: a plurality of elders.”
Yes, I agree, and do believe scripture is clear on that. In fact, that’s why I believe the scriptures teach a plurality of elders, given the large number of people coming to the faith during the first few years of the apostles’ ministry. With all those new converts, the apostles knew that they couldn’t shepherd them all.
But let’s face it, one of the main reasons why some churches amass large congregations is specifically because of the popularity/personality/rhetorical ability of the pastor. People like the pastor: they like his preaching, his personality, his fire, his message, etc., and his popularity spreads like a rock star, bringing people into the church.
Because of this, a plurality of elders is often shunned because, knowing their growth is the result of the pastor, pointing people to learn from someone other than that pastor goes against the very reason they came into the church. Add to that the CEO head-honcho type of pastor whose pride will never stoop to allow others to have equal authority with him (’I built this church-thus I run this church’), and you’ve got a real problem. The result is large churches with more and more compromise of the truth; a leader whose pride becomes the foundational rule of the church; and a large congregations with ‘tickled ears’ in that they love the preaching but are left to rot and die in their spiritual growth.
(sorry for the rant
)
I think there is a reason that the Lord brought persecution upon the Church at Jerusalem. Which should make us wonder why a superduperpeoplescooper persists for very long without persecution. I am also reminded of great big churches that were very good, even before the modern era. MetTabLondon comes to mind.
If in reality a church is doing business, however, I think that certain things should be taking place. In the great commission sense, disciples should be being prepared to “do” all the things that the teachers were taught to do. Specifically that means raising up elders as over seer of groups and if we follow the template of the tribes of Israel, at some point the land should be sub-divided. By that I mean, we should be missional. A missional church should be one that can establish congregations within congregations for export. I have always thought it a great idea, but that is because it is mine, that at some point a portion of a congregation, having been prepared, would back in the Church Van, pack the newly weds up, and move them out to a new community of their own. Romantic, eh? Of course that would require that people really believed that they needed to leave all and follow Christ as a bride follows her groom, and it would involve the father/mother churches concentrated efforts to help support the dozens of families that would move as a tribe to another location, until they were able to begin a family of their own. This actually would work, even with small churches. The question really is, are we as members in general great commissionally minded?
Seems far fetched, but just think of it. A church of 10, 000 (thousand), prepares a missions church of five hundred (fifty). The mission church goes across town, you know in to the foreign slums or some upscale digs, same thing, and plants a new congregation, buying homes settling in, and generally changing the character of a neighborhood. Or, say the missions church is sent to a foreign country like Michigan from Southern California. They come in and with funding supplied by the remaining 9500 (950), build a new church and establish a new community of believers with core potential. Ahhh, its a pipe dream. Who would want to give up the great facilities that could be paid for with the money it would take to support serious missions?
Got another one, what if we limited the size of churches, and once they got so big, we would persecute them ourselves?
I think another problem with really large churches is that it is almost impossible to maintain the intimacy that the family bonds of Christianity that there should be. Even in my small country where a big church may only have 500 attending I know this is a problem, what must it not be like for 10,000?
I think Thomas’ idea is sound, multiply and divide…plant….but make sure strong and stable folks are among the leavers.
Plurality is absolutely key in any size of a church not least a big one…if a church has 10 families it is not biblically ordered unless it has at least two pastors.
JP